Well, that sounds good since you apparently have someone who knows how
to operate the Frontier machine. Perhaps an ISO 400 film would be best,
since that's neither slow nor ultra fast. And the *istD is frequently
used at ISO 400. If you shoot ISO 200 with the *istD, your choices of
film are very limited.
On Nov 24, 2004, at 3:21 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Of course, I'm not sure on #4 either. My thought was to use a process
that's "typical" and considered, more or less, a standard. Maybe
using a
Frontier with Crystal Archive is neither. By standard I don't mean the
best, but a point by which other options may be judged. IAC, it would
seem, and someone please feel free to jump in and correct this point,
that
for the intended purpose of seeing how the latitude of film compares
with
that of digital, unless the differences were very subtle, the Frontier
should be an adequate test.
The lab I use has tweaked their system to allow for finer gradations
between settings, or so I've been told by the Photoshop guy (not the
printer guy). I can't explain it better because I don't know all the
technical terms, but apparently there are buttons on the machine that
allow
for a certain degree of separation between color and exposure
adjustments,
and this lab has halved the difference between the steps.
I suppose it's more important that the settings be left to "normal,"
i.e.,
no exposure or color compensation, so if there are differences in
shadow
and highlight detail, they won't be masked. Does that sound about
right?
Anyway, I'll start looking around for an istD to use for this test
after
the holiday weekend. I just wonder what film, or films, would make
for a
fair test. Maybe using a couple-three brands and speeds would be the
best
choice.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11/24/2004 10:18:15 AM
Subject: Re: Film vs. Digital - A necessary test
Hi Shel,
I think you have it exactly right. My only reservation might be
number 4.
Perhaps it would be better to have a top pro lab produce the best
possible
print from each format. That might very well be a wet print from the
negative and an inkjet print from the digital file. But I'm not sure. I
think I would ask a photofinishing expert.
Wheatfield. What say you?
Not being a "testing maven" I respect all comments and positions.
They
all
seem to have merit. As noted, I may do a similar test at some point.
What
suggestions are there from the list as to the most useful testing
parameters? Here's what I was thinking:
1) Using lenses that provide about the same equivalent focal length;
2) Using ISO speeds that are comparable between film and the digi;
3) Using print film instead of slide since the main reason for the
test
is
to compare the latitude of digi v film;
4) Getting prints made to the same size using the same enlarging
system,
probably something like a Fuji Frontier.
Since the main reason for the test is #3, how important are #1, #2,
and
#4. My thoughts are that as long as I'm comparing the two systems
for
#3,
it would be just as easy to look at other aspects for comparison as
well.
