to continue the farce... :-)
I had just written a laborious reply, but then the Outlook server crashed
and thus my client!
Here you have a shortened and an even more delayed reply. I found out that I
had been lying to you all: there is not more graininess in black and white
scans (Ilford XP2 setting in vuescan) than in color scans 'generic setting
in vuescan). There seems to be somewhat more contrast in b/w scans.
--> I like to ask you color wizards to tell me if the generic setting scans
of the ilford xp2 film show a distinctive color cast on your calibrated
monitor or seem black and white enough. I also like to know whether it
should be black and white if scanned with 'generic color' setting in
vuescan, since the film has this purple color (i.s.o. an orange mask)
attributed to what is called an anti-halation dye by others in this thread.
Here are the scans, all less than 400k in size :
(Copyright J&F Oostrom, images of some kids at a wedding, please download
and view only)
Common settings of images:
white balance(!), auto white + black point, both at 0.05, profile:
proPhotoRGB
Generic film type setting overview scan
(film type generic color negative, size reduction x2, clean filter, latter
two settings are used most by me, afterwards unsharp masked and auto-levels)
http://home.wish.net/~jerfi/generic02.jpg
The histogram shows differences especially in the green band if compared to
red and blue
Ilford XP2 setting overview scan
(film type Ilford XP2 400 negative, size reduction x2, clean filter, latter
two settings are used most by me, afterwards unsharp masked and auto-levels)
http://home.wish.net/~jerfi/ilfordxp2.jpg
Generic film type setting crop scan
(film type generic color negative, no size reduction x1, no filter, no
unsharp mask, only auto-levels)
http://home.wish.net/~jerfi/generic05.jpg
This is a fairly grainy scan, but to my surprise not much less than the
following scan:
Ilford XP2 400 setting crop scan
(film type ilford xp2 400 negative, no size reduction x1, no filter, no
unsharp mask, only auto-levels)
http://home.wish.net/~jerfi/ilfordxp2crop.jpg
Interestingly, the .jpg versions show even less of a color cast than their
.tif originals. Perhaps that info is compressed too. Anyway if it shows too
much of a color cast on your screens then perhaps I have to recalibrate my
monitor cq. build a new profile for it.
The reason I thought that the generic setting showed less graininess is
because I had made scans some time ago, also using Ilford XP2 setting for
Ilford XP2 film that seemed very grainy to me, much more than the prints
showed. If that was due to 'aliasing' then I expect all Ilford scans to show
it, but it does not.
Here I have a small example of such a scan. It shows a bit of the graininess
which was very prominent in the full resolution scan. This image has been
reduced more than 4 times in size, but still it seems more grainy to me than
the overview scans listed above (especially the pants, compare them to dark
parts in the other scans).
http://home.wish.net/~jerfi/prisonandme.jpg
Thanks in advance for your time and insight.
Jerry Oostrom
http://home.wanadoo.nl/joostrom
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oostrom, Jerry [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 7:54 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Profiling, Ilford XP2 and Vuescan.
>
> Sorry, the scans will have to come later (begin of next week), something
> came in between...
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Oostrom, Jerry [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 8:19 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Profiling, Ilford XP2 and Vuescan.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyway, I'll put an example scan
> > somewhere (tomorrow) and then you color wizards can tell me what color
> > cast
> > it has. I'll also do the b/w version and see if it is still as grainy as
> > before, because the grainy examples were from long ago and I must find
> out
> > first if I haven't been lying to you all.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> >
> > Jerry
