Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] GH2 specs

Subject: Re: [OM] GH2 specs
From: David Irisarri <zuiko3000@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 11:51:44 -0400
Hi Moose,

The only reason why I used to work with slides was the following one:

Color rendition was awesome! I didn´t like negative color at. I tried many
films and the only one I liked was Kodak Portra 160 NC/VC. I don´t know if
they are still in the market. The rest of films weren´t suitable for my
taste. On the other hand I loved Ektachrome family, specially Ektachrome
E100S, (I think Kodak changed the name for E100G). Film grain was always
coarser and I didn´t care too much about narrower dynamic range of slide
film because I used to work with OM4Ti multispot metering. This light
metering system allowed me to optimized exposure really well. Another huge
advantage was that I could buy an Ektachrome/Velvia/Provia/Astia slide for
calibrating the scanner, so I only had to press the SCAN button and the
exactly same image was appearing in the screen (taking into account Ekta
space is bigger than AdobeRGB and the little sRGB color space). I didn´t
have to fine-tune anything.
So what can I say, it´s a matter of taste. I have seen the awesome images
from C.H.Ling and his portraits are wonderful but I still prefer Ektachrome
colors and this is why I am looking forward to seeing color reversal film
emulation in Olympus cameras. I would have loved taking a picture selecting
a Velvia profile in the new E-5 but maybe one day...

Regards,

Dave



2010/9/19 Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>

>  On 9/19/2010 12:38 AM, David Irisarri wrote:
> > I have tried almost everything to scan the slides perfectly sharp. :) but
> the best results were dividing the slides in cells and stitching all of
> them.
>
> I've done some crazy, time eating things with images, but you've got me
> beat, hands down.
>
> You are throwing around a lot of claims here. Do you have personal
> experience or references?
>
> > Nikon LS-4000 gives you drum scan quality.
>
> Jan has already addressed this with his personal, detailed testing
> experience with both. He disagrees.
>
> > DOF is extremelly narrow but is sharper than Canon FS4000.
>
> Here I disagree. I have not personally ever used a Nikon film scanner. I
> did spend way too much time trolling the web,
> looking at reviews and comparisons, before choosing a film scanner.  One
> need really go no farther than the reviews at
> photo-i  (although other comparisons generally agree) to see that this
> isn't true. Vincent's reviews include direct
> comparisons at the pixel level of scans of the same pieces of film.
>
> Perhaps the most obvious thing his tests show is how subtle and difficult
> absolute answers are in this area. Slight
> differences in contrast and sharpening can make a big difference in
> apparent sharpness. Still, my experience was that
> it's possible to convince oneself that either the Canon or the Nikon is
> just subtly capable of rendering more detail. I
> had myself convinced in favor of Nikon at one point. Then I downloaded the
> samples and played a little in PS.
>
> I've also found that multiple passes on the Canon can slightly increase the
> resolution. I don't know why. I only
> discovered it when comparing single vs. multi. for dynamic range.
>
> I just don't think there is a difference great enough to ever be noticed in
> any practical use. With most films, I can
> clearly see the grain clumps, so there would simply be no more image detail
> from greater scanner resolution.
>
> I do believe that Nikon has just the slightest edge in shadow detail tonal
> differentiation. Then again, it also has
> flare I didn't know about at the time that the Canon doesn't.
>
> > I would never use negative if I had to come back to analog photography. I
> got the best results with Velvia 50 and Ektachrome T-grain slides.
>
> Interesting. As CH just said, slides have less dynamic range than digital,
> while negative film has a slight edge over
> digital, so far. I stopped using slide film as soon as I started scanning.
>
> So I must assume "best results with Velvia 50 and Ektachrome T-grain
> slides." does not include dynamic range. Reversal
> films have a color reference in simply viewing the slide, so if one is
> happy with the vision of the world of a
> particular film, it's easy to reproduce that in scanning the slide. Neg
> film has no such reference, so no given film has
> an inherent "look" across all scanners and scanner operators.
>
> On the other hand, for those of us who never liked all the differences in
> color rendition between slide films, using ICC
> color profiles provides a means of getting highly consistent, technically
> accurate color across different films.
>
> Moose
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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