From: Peter Marshall (petermarshall@cix.co.uk)
Date: 10/26/02-02:54:26 AM Z
>
> I asked this question on one of the newsgroups but am repeating it
> here since there are several people on the list who are pretty
> experienced with scanning. The question is, are some 35mm negative
> films better than others when the negatives are to be used for
> scanning and making digital prints and/or to make enlarged negatives
> for alt printing, or do the same considerations of grain and
> sharpness hold when scanning as when making prints in the darkroom?
> If some films are better than others for this purpose I would
> appreciate some explanation of the reasons.
>
> Sandy King
>
Sandy,
If you have a film scanner that used IR dust removal (dICE) then go for a
chromogenic film, as it will work with these, but not with a silver image.
(It doesn't work with Kodachrome either.)
I prefer XP2 to TCNS, but either will give good scans. XP2 is great unless
you underexpose it. You can also work from colour neg film of course,
converting to black and white in Photoshop (I normally use the Channel
Mixer) but XP2 is better.
However, different scanners seem to react differently to films, partly
because of different resolutions, partly different light sources. So what
suits my set up may be different for you.
Peter Marshall
Photography Guide at About http://photography.about.com/
email: photography.guide@about.com
_________________________________________________________________
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
and elsewhere......
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 11/14/02-02:40:27 PM Z CST