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: T400CN was filmscanners: Grain, Noise, et al



Lynn,

Actually we probably both had the same problem - if you don't specify with
the lab their machine will automatically print each exposure as close to the
'right' print they can. I've taken to stipulating that they use no
compensation on any prints. When I got my most recent camera (Nikon N80) I
took it out to test drive all the bells and whistles, including exposure and
flash compensation. I hadn't asked them to print all the prints without
compensation and when I got the prints back they all looked the same
exposure-wise. Not much of a test and not very clever on my part.

Norman

--- Begin Message ---
Norman wrote:

>>I played with my exposures to see how the film would react to slight
>under-exposure in an attempt to heighten the contrast a bit but only went
>under by 1/2 stop. The film's latitude must be very wide as I couldn't
>really detect any difference from 'properly' exposed shots.

I once shot a roll 4 full stops underexposed, trying to capture the effects
of a certain safety light we were marketing. The film came back "perfectly
exposed," warts and all, which *wasn't* exactly what I was shooting for. :-)

Best regards--LRA


>From: "Norman Unsworth" <unsworth_norman@aclink.org>
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
>Subject: RE: T400CN was filmscanners: Grain, Noise, et al
>Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:25:20 -0400
>
>I played with my exposures to see how the film would react to slight
>under-exposure in an attempt to heighten the contrast a bit but only went
>under by 1/2 stop. The film's latitude must be very wide as I couldn't
>really detect any difference from 'properly' exposed shots.
>
>RE: the pink cast on prints, it was my belief as well that the lab simply
>got lazy or didn't pay attention when they printed the negs. It was a Kodak
>lab (I used Kodak processing mailers) and I intend to call and bitch at
>them
>for making what must have been a mistake simply out of negligence. No doubt
>they just ran everything through a machine and, since it's c41 processing,
>just let the machine print on whatever is their stock color paper. So much
>for trying to save a few pennies on processing...
>
> > > The
> > > negs seem perfectly fine - my scans don't have a trace of pink (even
> > > using a
> > > generic color negative setting for film type). I haven't played with
> > > them a
> > > great deal but grain seems minimal, as the literature promises.
> >
> > Yup, it is amazing film, and I have had experienced Art Eds query
>whether
> > shots done on 35mm T400CN were medium format.
> >
> > Vuesmart's B&W setting for 400CN works well. Or you can scan at 16bit
>RGB
> > and convert to grayscale later in PS.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Tony Sleep
> > http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film
> > scanner info
> > & comparisons
> >
> >
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


--- End Message ---


 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.