What is this 'film' thing you keep mentioning. I feel your pain. We have largely gone to a digital world and that means that less and less film is being used. Less and less attention is being paid to it by the labs. You want to do it good, you have to do it yourself. I have been scanning for the past week or two with my Minolta Scan Dual II and do not enjoy it. I am so done with film.
-- Best regards, Bruce Thursday, March 18, 2010, 8:04:24 PM, you wrote: NW> I have been fighting with bad scans for quite a while now. NW> By bad I mean images that when viewed at 100% look as though shot with NW> a cheap digicam. NW> So today I took a roll of film to a "pro" lab in the big city and paid NW> about three times as much as the discount stores charge to get some NW> "good" scans from my roll of film. NW> Imagine my disappointment when I get the CD in the machine and NW> discover the same kind of cheap looking scan. NW> Here's an example: NW> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pedalingprose/4443788489/sizes/o/ NW> Turns out the sharpening method I used exaggerated the effect, but I'm NW> leaving it as such for the time being so everyone can see what I'm NW> referring to. NW> See especially in the dark areas? That's not grain, that's digital NW> noise ... unless I am completely mistaken. NW> And I'm really sick of it. Is there no one left that makes good scans NW> from a roll of film? Help! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
