Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin

Subject: Re: [OM] How many pixels in a 35mm film image - Pop Photo weighsin
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 20:20:05 -0800
C.H.Ling wrote:

<http://home.attbi.com/0.000000E+00dreammoose/wsb/html/view.cgi-photo.html--SiteID-322698.html>
is a 1000iece of a scan of a Kodak Gold 400 negative. Even at this
magnification, grain is only noticable in the sky and I don't find it
objectionable. Assuming you do find the grain objectionable, it's just a
matter of different standards/needs.


I don't know how you achieve this scan, it seem better than my experience
especially with Gold 400, are you sure it is Gold 400 or Royal Gold 400?

That's where I find this all rather confusing and come to the conclusion I wrote about that there are wide experiencedl variations across hardware, software and wetware. I just put the neg strip in the holder, blow it off with Dust-off and click on scan and what you see is the result. (Speaking of grain/sharpness only, I'm sure I adjusted the color.) I just checked the negs and it is Royal Gold 400-3. The negative markings are "RC 400-3 Kodak" alternating frame by frame with "Royal 400-3". I only saw the first one when I looked quickly. sorry for any confusion. Neither is a film I'm familiar with. I just got this roll as a freebie with some other film.

On
the other hand I don't need to print a 20x30" print to see the grain, it is
very obvious even at 5x7 print. Something on the monitor doesn't mean it
will be the same on print, just like you see a very good 1024x760 pixel
picture on monitor, if you print at 8x10 (monitor size) obviously it will
not look as good.

Again, simply not my experience, no grain visible on 8x10. Of course, we are using quite different scanners and printing processes. I have a Canoscan FS2710 and I print on an Epson 1270. I assume that may be at least part of the difference.

As I said in my last post, scanning is not cut and dried, but quite variable 
across hardware, software and user.

With a good equipment, scanning slide can be easier, it has much less hesitate 
than scanning negative.

Can't we just agree we have different experiences? My personal experience is of no siginificant difference between scanning slides and scanning negatives - with my equipment, with my way of working, for my images and for the results I like.

Peace,
    Moose



< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz