Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Getting started question



At 07:15 PM 7/13/01 -0700, Pat Perez wrote:

>I'd suggest using slide film for learning. It is less expensive to process,
>and you can see the actual result, not having to guess what is on the film,
>as you would with negatives.
>
>I wish I had the discipline to shoot that much for practice's sake. I could
>certainly use it.


For scanning, there are some real advantages to 
working with negative film.  Negatives are far 
less likely to hit the dynamic range limits of 
the scanner.

For shooting, negative film will give you far 
more exposure lattitude than slides.  There are 
many "natural light" scenes that can be captured 
quite nicely on negative film, but not on a 
slide, due to the lack of exposure lattitude 
on the latter.

Granted, the primary problem with negatives 
is not being able to "see" the image on the 
negative itself.  I find this to be a small 
price to pay, given all the other advantages.

Fuji Reala, Kodak Supra (100) and Kodak Royal 
Gold (100) are beautiful films for natural-
light landscape photography.

Does anyone know if Reala is available in 
120 format?  I haven't found it yet.  For 
120, my favorite so far is Fuji 160 NPC.


rafe b.





 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.