On 10/12/03 12:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have another question regarding the tonal info in color negs. I learnt back > in the analogue days that transparencies offer a higher tonal range than negs.
Dear Jan, This certainly isn't the case now and I would like to think that this has always been so (although I haven't been on the planet long enough to bet on it). Negatives carry much more tonal information than transparencies. > And why would the fact that there is a bigger tonal range lead to the > conclusion that more contrast needs to be applied? Well, because there is so much information - a gentle rise out of the deepest shadows, an equally gentle approach to the brightest highlights with beautiful flowing tone in between - the appearance of a 'straight' print from a negative can feel a little flat. These things are all subjective, of course, but this is generally the case. Transparencies take a lot of decisions out of your hands too early in the printing process (in my opinion); shadows block up and highlights blow out far too quickly. However, this does give an immediately pleasing result to most people but, for me, there just isn't enough scope for control at the scanning, tonal/colour correction, retouching and printing stages. I should have just said 'post-production'! I hope this helps. Best wishes, JL -- _________________________ :: Jack Lowe Studio :: :: +44 (0)191 224 5150 :: _________________________ =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
