So I mentioned before that I received an Epson v700 and have started to scan some negs, and will purchase a printer in little while to put out enlarged digital negatives of my collection of "damaged" negs - a very reluctant compromise on my part since I hate computers. I am still getting the hang of scanning negs and have posted my first three scans ever - example:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...&postcount=776
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=79734
I didn't futz with any settings & I can see the "errors" of this scan - hotspots etc. but I didn't notice the blue-ish tint and lack of contrast until I used a different computer monitor. I guess that means I have to purchase a calibration thingy too - $400! (yikes!) - and hope that everyone else who views my stuff online has calibtrated their monitors too.
But there are more fundamental questions involved: I assume the goal is to ensure that the scanned file looks like what an enlarged print would look like if/when you print the negative the traditional way using an enlarger etc. Is that right? When people post photos on their websites (especially for print sales) do they make an effort to ensure that the two match? CAN a scanned negative really look like an actual print or is it assumed to be an approximation? SHould you include a disclaimer to that effect? If you scan a negative rather than a print, how do you replicate effects like toning and diffusing that would be seen on a print? Do PS filters really come out the same? Is that a reason to scan the print instead of the negative?
Bookmarks