Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: neg or tran for scanning?

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    3,805

    neg or tran for scanning?

    "...if everyone searched before posting questions here there wouldn't be a forum."

    If everyone searched before posting there would be a more easily searched archive and a better forum. Instead of a glorified chat room, which is what exists when searches are skipped.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    953

    neg or tran for scanning?

    true,

    but you would wise to remember that making the same reply as has already been made is not exactly taking a leaf out of your own book.

    best laugh I've had on this list so far.

    and thank you Brian for taking the grown up view.

    p.s. I don't feel about it. Anyone else want to do some whining?

  3. #13
    Abuser of God's Sunlight
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    brooklyn, nyc
    Posts
    5,796

    neg or tran for scanning?

    "A question to those that prefer negative film for landscapes - what film do you prefer?"

    I've only been using color for a little while, so I can't give detailed comparisons films. But I strongly prefer low contrast portrait films. Been using fuji NPS and like it. People like to debate the relative merits of NPS and kodak portra, but that's a coke/pepsi kind of thing. They're both from the same camp.

    I agree with the photographer Mike Smith (http://www.kochgallery.com/artists/contemporary/Smith/series/01.html) that most modern films were designed for the color blind. I find that most high contrast/high saturation films exagerate colors and make work look like advertising photographs.

  4. #14

    neg or tran for scanning?

    "I find that most high contrast/high saturation films exagerate colors and make work look like advertising photographs."

    I think that might just be the point - and the market.

  5. #15
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,864

    neg or tran for scanning?

    film? NPS in 4x5 for all color work and even for some b&w conversion.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    at age 73:
    "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep"

  6. #16

    neg or tran for scanning?

    "most modern films were designed for the color blind"

    Paulr,

    This seems to be the case with people who love Velvia. It has it's place. I've always favoured going with films like Astia, Reala, or NPS. The contrast is lower, the colors are not pumped up on steriods, and shadow detail seems to hold better because of the wider exposure latitude.

    Scanning though is another matter. As much as I love neg films, trannies seem to show somewhat less grain...at least on my Imacon. But grain is such a small issue now even in 6x7. Fuji's latest rendition of Astia has a RMS of 7. Reala and Pro 160 are about the equivalent for a neg film. 16x20 commercial shots I do of large groups show no grain. Thus on 4x5, you'd even have less of an issue. Extreme crops I've done from 4x5 Astia, (equivalent to about 32x40) shows minimal grain.

    As has been said, it depends on what you prefer. Don't let grain be the deciding factor.....let the "look" dictate to you.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 1998
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Posts
    2,214

    neg or tran for scanning?

    I use Portra NC in all the formats I shoot regularly. I like the palette, both for landscapes and for how informal portraits of my kids turn out.

    I used a fair bit of NPS at one point, but it has a decided pink tone that made my more pale-faced relatives look distinctly sunburnt. Snow came out a bit odd too. This was more than a simple colour cast, and hard to correct digitally. I also like the way I can fairly closely match colour rendition across film speeds with the Portra line, which you cannot do with Fuji products.

    Portra is a bit wierd in that it has muted colours when printed conventionally, but tends towards over-pure pastels when scanned. It must be something to do with the difference between the absorbances of C41 paper and the spectrum of scanner light sources. I have seen this printing my own C41 on various papers, and in scans from flatbeds and Imacons. Easy enough to correct for on a scan, but you need to watch out for it (or work with it for a sort of manga illustrative look).

    I think the grain-up on scans of negative films is probably something more subtle than the size of the grain in the emulsion. It may be grain aliasing, in which case a more correlated or sharply-defined grain pattern will exacerbate the problem, or it may be a form of 'noise pumping'. Both issues can be solved on a drum scanner, if the operator and/or control software allows, but on cheapie flatbeds there is only so much you can do.

  8. #18

    neg or tran for scanning?

    portra 160NC, portra 100T and fuji NPL and i think i will try the 400NC

Similar Threads

  1. Scanning in Los Angeles
    By Mike Boden in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 3-Feb-2006, 11:16
  2. Scanning in NYC
    By paulr in forum Resources
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27-Oct-2005, 16:15
  3. New Scanning Option
    By George Stewart in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 20-Aug-2005, 20:54
  4. scanning b/w issue
    By Herb Cunningham in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 22-Feb-2005, 00:29
  5. Betterlight Scanning Back for Film Scanning?
    By William Leigh in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18-Dec-2004, 13:50

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •