Which brings up some additional questions--
I'm a real newbie to this area, though a physicist by trade. I've suddenly
gotten interested in photography again, after a long lapse. I bought me an
Acer 2740S, which seems to be a reasonable low-cost entry machine, and
began exploring unknown (to me) territories.
I thought I'd stick to Fuji negative film and see what happens with various
speeds, from 800 down to 100 (is there anything slower readily available?),
and various VueScan settings.
Any suggestions as to what I might expect, what to try, and what to look
for?
. . . . . .
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 00:07 +0100 (BST), you wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:31:24 -0400 rafeb (rafeb@channel1.com) wrote:
>
>> >1. With 200 film, is the grain "large" enough for the 2700 DPI to
>> record it?
>> >If so could some one describe it (or email me a couple scan clips
>> showing
>> >examples?)
>>
>>
>> To answer your question. Yes.
>
>I suggest you stick some of your old ISO200 pics through that LS8000, and
>see if they now exhibit the 'grain' they did at 2700ppi - I bet they
>don't:)
>
>One interesting anomaly of the SS4000 is that whilst it shows very little
>grain from Fuji Superia 400, and not much even with 800, it shows some of
>the gritty pseudo-grain with Fuji 200 which I ascribe to aliasing. It
>certainly isn't present in lab prints direct from the negs. I believe the
>ISO200 grain just happens to be of a range of sizes which cause an aliased
>result with this CCD pitch, where 400 and 800 are larger and do not - so
>you see 'true' grain from these materials.
>
>To see true grain from ISO50-100 colour neg or tranny, I think you'll have
>to be on the far side of 8000ppi.
>
>Regards
>
>Tony Sleep
> - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
>info & comparisons
. . . . . .
Socrates was a lawyer. He could argue, with equal conviction, on either side
of any question.
