Yes, Nikon scanner gives grainly images but can't agree with the dynamic
range, with Vuescan you can capture the whole range on the negative.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Chuck, you are correct that it's a low of physics here that tonality
is neither created nor destroyed. It just changes form.
However, there are three reasons why I'd prefer to work with scanned
workprints:
1. Grain control. Film scanners, especially the Nikons, have this
unearthly trait of making grainless negs look like images from your A1
at ISO 800. A fine-grained 35mm film will give you a 5x7ish working
image (I'd do the full-image with rebate onto an 8x10 sheet) that is
essentially grainless. This then will scan cleanly.
2. Dynamic range of the neg. There are lots of tricks in the darkroom
to recovery stuff hidden in the toe and shoulder which is lost in a
digital scan.
3. The curves of the film and the curves of the paper complement each
other. The end result is usually a nice straight-line section with a
beautifully progressing dynamic compression in the shadows and
highlights. To get the same from a digital scan requires pushing and
pulling the curves so much that the grain (and other things) become
non-linear.
4. OK, I lied. The fourth thing that comes to mind is dodging and
burning. I much prefer doing it in the darkroom. It's much more
organic that way and again, it doesn't turn the grain all whacky.
Chris has managed to do pretty well with digitizing negs, but I'm not
nearly as good as he is in that and it also points to the fact I
prefer to work in the darkroom and have no allergies with the
chemistry.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|