FDanB@aol.com
Date: 10/26/02-06:41:07 PM Z
Darryl said in his message...
>Oh, I'd forgotten about Dan B. (sorry Dan). He was shooting TMAX 3200,
>rated at 800 asa for his original source before scanning and making the
>inkjet negatives. I wouldn't be suprised if a good amount of his work is
>moving into a total digital workflow; he was toting a Nikon 990 last
>time we spoke.
Sorry to jump in so late with another $0.02 of information but I was out
of town and not checking email (which is out of control anyway).
Several years ago I was researching this very issue: which films would
scan well. I'd been happy with scans from the chromogenic black and
whites but wanted to switch to color negative to gain the ability to
"filter" the image in Photoshop (using the Channel Mixer that several
people mentioned) instead of filtering on the lens at the time of
exposure. I actually got through to a smart person at Kodak who suggested
the Portra films as one of their first emulsions to be designed with
scanning in mind. (At this point no film manufacturer would be so crazy
as to suggest their new emulsions AREN'T great for scanning.) The Portra
160 NC is an ISO 160 film so I was hoping to see some REAL advantages in
switching from the Kodak TCN that is ISO 400.
John Sexton always advises making direct comparisons when changing
materials or methods so I loaded two cameras (shutters calibrated), one
with my "old" TCN and the other with Portra 160 NC and started testing.
Here's what I found:
* The shadows were much more open in the Portra scans. I figured I'd have
to start shooting the TCN at EI 250 or less to get the same shadow
detail. So much for the big speed difference between the two films.
* Next, there was much finer grain, not a big surprise when going from a
400 film to 160 but it was still a nice bonus.
* There was greater smoothness in the darker image tones. Sometimes my
scans from the TCN seems to exhibit some posterization (maybe I was
screwing up somewhere) in shadows; there was none in the Portra scans.
* And of course, there was the BIG benefit of being able to perform color
filtration in Photoshop to bring out sky/cloud contrast or foliage detail
or minimize skin blemishes or any of the other things we would use
filters for on the camera.
In short, I switched to shooting Portra 160 NC (there is a VC--vivid
color--version but I figured the NC--normal color--version of the film
would have gentler highlights that would scan better) even though all of
my final prints were platinum prints made from digital negs.
A bit of advice in your film scanning: if you are scanning transparency
films, dynamic range is important in order to "see" into the dense areas
of the chrome. If you are scanning negatives, then bit depth is your
friend because you will be stretching the relatively low dynamic range of
neg film to create good blacks and whites in your final print. Without
going into detail, I like to take raw, high-bit scans (but attaching a
good film profile) into Photoshop where there are more controls for
tweaking the tonality.
Shortly after switching to Portra...I surprised myself by abandoning film
altogether. It was unexpected but all of a sudden I found myself focusing
on the positive attributes of digital capture rather than the negatives
(no pun intended). I'm currently using a Nikon Coolpix 5000 but will be
shooting in Mexico with a D100 next week. Can't wait to have a real
ground glass in the viewfinder again! I love being able to catalog and
proof hundreds of images with a few clicks of the mouse. And it's really
nice to forget about X-ray hassles and such when traveling.
Film still has many advantages for some shooters but I gotta tell you, I
don't miss it a bit.
Hope this helps!
Dan
Dan Burkholder
P.O. Box 111877
Carrollton, TX 75011-1877
USA
972-242-9819
fax 972-242-9651
danphoto@aol.com
www.danburkholder.com
Author of the book nobody should be without:
"Making Digital Negatives for Contact Printing."
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
- Albert Einstein
"Knowledge in moderation ain't bad either."
- Dan Burkholder
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 11/14/02-02:40:27 PM Z CST