I think you mean "lousy scanners can't handle..." ;) The SprintScan 120 much prefers a properly exposed and processed neg. A low base density is preferable, but that's also true for printing.
Acros in Studional is great for this -- the base is virtually clear. -Aaron -----Original Message----- From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subj: Re: OT: Developer Date: Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:15 pm Size: 2K To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> Too thin actually means too thin. Underexposed negs are thinner than properly exposed negs. I tend to develop for slightly thinner negs as tehy scan better than ones developed to print well (Scanners can't handle as much contrast as wet paper often wants). -Adam frank theriault wrote: > As all of you (or at least many of you) know, I only do film, I don't > develop my own, I don't print my own, I have no interest in developing > and printing. I like taking pictures and bringing them to my lab, > coming back a week later and picking up negs or prints, as the case > may be. > > As you've all noticed, the stuff I post often looks like poo. I'm not > very good at scanning. Much of my early reputation as a purveyor of > fuzzy pics comes from my sketchy abilities at the scanner. > > Every year I got to Grandfather Mountain, and every year someone new > from the list looks at my pix and says, "Holy crap, some of these are > really really sharp. I love the way these things look! Those are > amazing grey-tones. The blacks are deep, the greys are beautiful. > How do you do it?" > > More specifically, Mat Maesson asked what developer Robert the Lab Guy > and Printer uses. I was speaking to him today (Robert, not Mat), and > I finally remembered to ask him. > > He says that he just uses regular Agfa Multigrade Developer, and > prints my stuff on Agfa Pearl paper. I told him about the compliments > I get on how the prints look (which may have to do with lowered > expectations from poor scans <g>), and he said a great part of how my > prints (specifically) turn out has to do with my exposures, which he > says are usually bang on, and never "too thin" (which I guess means > lots of detail?). He offered the opinion (as he has on numerous > occasions, and as I've previously reported to this list) that those > that shoot with manual meters tend to have more consistent and better > exposed negs than those who rely on AE. Of course, I'm sure there are > exeptions to that rule. > > Or, he could just be saying all that stuff just to "stroke me", and > keep me coming back... > > <vbg> > > cheers, > frank > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
