If hassling with the negative carrier doesn't bother you then go with that
and forget the slide mounts. Flat film stores more compactly than slides,
if nothing else. Be aware, however, that you can get bowing from negative
strips, though I'm not sure if that's as big an issue there as it is with
slides--maybe someone who has worked extensively with both formats will
comment--my strips come back to me with little curl almost always. Over
time the strips might have a tendency to bow or whatever, however the
carrier's design does argue against this being a problem _once you get the
film loaded properly_.
With time I've gotten used to the funky negative carrier that comes with
the Polaroid (my biggest concern now is the plastic
construction--eventually it appears that it will break) and I can now slip
in a new strip in no time flat. Usually. Sometimes (not often) it doesn't
work right and I need to redo it, which speaks more to my uncoordinated
fingers I'd guess and gets mainly back to my original thoughts on the
subject, as with slides that's a nonissue--just plop those little buggers
into their slots.
Someone else made the point that with negatives you're feeding six frames
to the scanner at a time as opposed to a maximum of four with slides, the
implication being that the former system offers some real benefit with
regards to time I suppose. For me, that benefit is purely potential and
practically moot. I rarely have six consecutive frames of negatives that
will be used--in fact I know that hasn't happened. I usually bracket my
night work, so forget that stuff right away, and shooting in the street is
hit and miss at best so even hand-held shots will rarely (if ever) find six
winners in a row or even three out of six. (Some users claim to be able to
have incredible percentages of "keepers" in every roll, but I don't know
that I buy it. I've been shooting as long as most people and my hit rate is
around 10%, if not less yet. So, either our standards of acceptability are
very far apart or these other people only shoot at a very small fraction of
my rate. That might be it, as I don't care about film expenditure, only the
final image; I'd gladly burn two or three full rolls of film for one
picture I was after.) So, I'd turn around the other fellow's assessment
and say that in this area the slide carrier would outshine the negative
carrier: it is probable (possible) that you could (would) load four slides
you know you want to work with at a time.
Tris
In a message dated 4/15/02 4:10:05 PM Central Daylight Time,
tristanjohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Scanning slides would be a much easier procedure
My real concern was lost image area from the mount and the potential for
them not being as flat. Bill Barber
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|