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: OT:X-ray fogging



on 9/8/01 12:03 PM, Lawrence Smith at lsmith@lwsphoto.com wrote:

> You've got to be kidding.  E6 the same everywhere?  I've taken identical
> shots one minute apart in consistant lighting on separate rolls and had
> different labs process them.  The results were VASTLY different.  How much
> experience have you had doing this?  Labs make a HUGE difference.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> This is generally true, at least with respect to ordinary C-41 and E-6
>> development.  If anyone disagrees, perhaps he can point me to
>> some examples that
>> show an obvious difference between one lab and another.
>> 
>> 
> 
...and I will add that from my experience, fresh film and quality processing
are more important than the brand of the lens or camera. Maybe my standards
are just too high, but I struggle to find an adequate E-6 processor. The
last lab ignored my "DO NOT MOUNT" instructions even though they were in 72
point font and bold.

Jim Snyder




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.