> Using very careful
> lighting and focussing, I now see that the "bubbles" are indeed
> present in undeveloped film.
I'm curious. Has anyone ever heard that this is a "problem" previously? I
mean, film has been around for decades...as well as exceptional cameras,
very good enlargers, and enlar
Roger Smith wrote:
> It also does nothing to explain why high-end scanners and
> huge enlargements don't show the bubbles, either. I expect someone
> out there will have an answer.
I suspect that the resolving power of enlarging lenses are not as high as the
resolving power of better
s
> I suspect that the resolving power of enlarging lenses are not as
> high as the resolving power of better
> scanners
I would completely disagree with that!
Ok
Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC
Austin Franklin wrote:
> > I suspect that the resolving power of enlarging lenses are not as
> > high as the resolving power of better
> > scanners
>
> I would completely disagree with that!
No, until recently, I never heard of bubble problems in standard film
print or reproduction processes, but I've suspected it in terms of a
consumer grade scanner problem for some time.
The mysterious black dots that sometimes show up by the hundreds or even
thousands on a scan which appears to ha
Hi Roger et al,
Interestingly enough, my best scans are from Provia 100F and 400F. I scanned
a few old Kodachrome 64 & 25's this afternoon and given their age (decades )
they weren't too bad. Compared to some recent Provia scans, they looked like
that ashtray's contents had fallen on them. Further
"Roger Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not only is the Fuji slide sharper, it shows relatively few,
> large bubbles compared to the Kodak slide. The Fuji bubbles appear as
> a few fairly obvious spots on a scan - easy to spot out in Photoshop.
> The Kodak slide when scanned shows a gritty, gra
Roger wrote:
> As you may have read, I now realize these mysterious
> "bubbles" are in undeveloped film and thus are not a
> product of developing quirks. I'm sorry for making
> such a misleading statement.
No need to apologise. I was expecting that they might have been bubbles
in the plastic o
