On Dec 15, 2005, at 12:46 AM, David Mann wrote:
It pays to optimize exposure and processing for scanning if it's
your primary means to render negatives to print. I normally shoot
negatives for scanning to be *just* dense enough to capture the
shadow details clearly, unblocked highs, and use minimal agitation
to reduce grain growth.
I shoot colour slide film and with its limited latitude there's not
much room for optimising exposure to scan. It doesn't take much to
clip the highlights and no amount of scanner adjustment will bring
the detail back.
I stopped shooting transparencies a decade or more ago due to the
exposure latitude problems, as well as the fact that slide films were
left behind by modern color negative emulsions for acutance (thinner
emulsion = better acutance). Color neg scans *much* better than color
slide, even with a less expensive scanner; the issue that remains is
learning how to accurately color balance it. A Macbeth color check
calibration exposure on every roll (or in every different lighting
situation!) is worthwhile to zero in on the correct balance.
Godfrey
