--- "F. Craig Callahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The one thing I've noticed in this discussion
> (perhaps I've missed it?) is that
> no one has asked what is being used to judge the
> results. The negs? Scans?
> Machine prints? If it's the latter, then there's
> really no way to accurately
> assess the exposure of the negative, given the
> limitations of machine processing
> and the high contrast of minilab print papers.
Very good point. Negative film, even consumer grade,
generally has a much wider dynamic range than does the
paper. Even a good custom print won't capture the full
range of the neg, so you end up deciding whether to
sacrifice highlights or shadows. Or you manipulate it
in Photoshop first.
=====
Bob Meyer
I wish I knew what I know now, when I was younger...
http:\\www.meyerweb.net\epson
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
