If you know more about what you are doing than that minimum wage dweeb,
then your scans are going to be better.
Most digital images whether scanned or direct do not look exactly like
an optical image. Strangely most people think the digital images are
better. But those of us who do not seem to have a lot more experience
than most of those who do. It may simply be a matter of what you are
used to. However the convenience of digital can not be beat for color work.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Toralf Lund wrote:
I think I've seen it in many cheap scans I've got from labs. Or at
least, the files seem to have far too much grain-like noise compared
to the actual granularity of the film, if you know what I mean. I
guess the real question is whether the flatbeds (or even dedicated
film scanners) would be much better in this respect.
And yes, the mileage does vary - quite possibly based on film type.
