Originally Posted by
Corran
Yes, that was precisely what I was pointing out. The statement earlier was "identical tonality" etc.
The "crop" was from the un-enlarged sample so not much to make out in resolution differences.
Anyway, I'll just point out here that none of the folks on the forum like me, Peter, Ari, etc. are getting rid of our high-end scanners...wonder why? Most users of the Epson here on the forum agree a 4x enlargement being about optimal. Alan has said he would "pay for a drum scan" if he wanted "the best" out of his negative. And Pali has said, he's not getting rid of his drum scanners (speaking of which, LOL Pali!). Meanwhile the person who has never used any of these devices wants to go round and round and round trying to justify the results as being "identical" after sharpening the ever living crap out of the scan. If he thinks it's "as good" then good for him. If its good enough for others, great. Some folks scan their film and never even print it, which is fine if that's what they are into. Personally I don't even print from scans often since about 2014, instead making silver gelatin prints.
Bookmarks