Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are color
> managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer etc. Those are
> all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from deterministic.
> Too many variables, lighting, exposure, development etc.
But a properly developed neg will usually have a standard "general"
correction. In my RA-4 days, I had a different basic filter pack for
each film, sounds a lot like profiling to me...
>
> Unless you truly profile/characterize a film/system (which I do BTW) for a
> consistent set of conditions (or include a color chart on every frame), I
> believe it just can't "work". There is far more to it than providing one
> film profile for everyone to use!
I believe that this system is how most of the minilabs are run...
Obviously a profile won't give you a perfect result, but what does? It's
not like they're going to prevent you from adjusting parameters...
sheesh. Profiling neg films is a potentially good way to get in the
ballpark, you'd be surprsied how accurate they can be, as long as there
are updates on a regular basis... Besides, why make such a fuss? This
may help some people out, and if you don't like it, don't use it! It is
always better to have more optioons than less. I'm happy to see a
scanner manufacturer trying to improve their product and including us in
the testing phase...
Isaac
