ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












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

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

Re: filmscanners: artificial light



On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:17:07 -0700 (PDT)  Robert Meier 
(robert_meier_photo@yahoo.com) wrote:

> 
> The best thing is still to use corresponding film or a correction
> filter to do a rough correction. Otherwise, some of the film layers
> will be underexposed. Which ones depends on the light source. The rest
> can be fixed in PS.

Quite right in theory, but in practice I have found no problem with any 
film I have tried. I have even achieved surprisingly good corrected scans 
from KR64. Superia400 has plenty of tolerance.

If I stick a (say) 30M on the front to shoot in, say, a strip-lit office, 
it causes more problems than it solves (v/f too dim to focus, forced to use 
a silly slow shutter speed and/or wide aperture with no DOF). I was very 
glad to be able to escape all that.

Regards 

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info 
& comparisons




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.