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: Negs vs slides again: was Color Negative Film Poll



Being new to the group, I've missed previous discussions.  Thanks for the
info and broadening my perspective (by about 6 stops)!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julian Robinson" <jrobinso@pcug.org.au>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 12:35 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Negs vs slides again: was Color Negative Film Poll


>
> >The bigger question is why shoot print
> >film if you're going to scan the images?
>
> This has been covered before, but I just decided to check my facts by
> looking at the characteristic curves for representative Kodak films.
These
> curves demonstrate admirably the main reason you might choose to shoot
with
> negative film over slide... simply, you can capture a LOT more of the
scene
> brightness range with neg film.
>
> - Slide films capture a range about 5 stops max.
> - Neg films capture a range about 11 stops!!
>
> You can't print this whole range of 11 stops directly, but one of the
great
> advantages of scanning is that you can process the image to restore as
much
> of this range as you want if you are prepared to do a bit of work.  I do
> this regularly to improve reproduction of my high-contrast scenes.  It is
> precisely BECAUSE I am scanning my images that I choose negs.
>
> At least if you have the info on film, you can access it somehow,  if not,
> (as in slides) it is gone forever.
>
> I agree though that a well-exposed flatly lit scene on slide is a
beautiful
> and satisfying thing, but most of real life is not flatly lit, certainly
> not limited to 4 or 5 stops range.  And I agree that grain is more of a
> problem with negs than slides, especially when underexposed when it can be
> completely unacceptable.
>
> These other advantages of the slide probably make it the best choice in
> studio work where you have complete control over lighting, but for travel
> and other more spontaneous work, this amateur anyway would choose neg
films
> every time.
>
> Julian
>
>
>
> At 23:05 21/11/01, Bernie wrote:
> >The bigger question is why shoot print
> >film if you're going to scan the images?  I shoot chromes for most of my
> >color work.  You have an original image for reference, can use
Ilfochrome,
> >reversal or an inteneg, if you want to print conventionally and scanning
is
> >more straightforward with a slide.  Provia 100 and 400 are my favorites.
>




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.