Peter wrote:
>It might also be worth bearing in mind that the tones of negative film
are
>reversed when they're scanned. So that what is seen as grain in the final
>scan is actually the gaps between the 'grains'.
Quite possibly. Makes sense, anyhow.
>I don't really think further analysis of film is much help though. IMHO.
Where I disagree here is that it's worth knowing which films scan best so
that you shoot with the best film in the first place. Using any old film
and trying to work backwards to a better result is always going to be more
difficult.
For my own purposes at least, I'll probably be using slide film where-ever
I can. B&W photography will be another issue however, so I'm interested
to see how tests of B&W films come up.
Oh - it's *definitely* worth documenting the differences between the structures
of slide and neg films and how they influence the results of scans.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
====================================================================
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
