RE: filmscanners: MF scanner for 120 strips

["LAURIE SOLOMON" <LAURIE@advancenet.net>]

Well David,

First welcome back; hope the vacation was a good one.

Now to the debate.  My experiences in talking with professional
photographers ( especially wedding and portrait photographers) is that they
typically send their color negative film off to professional labs that
process and proof the film.  In the process they also cut the film into
individual frames which are placed into individual envelopes that are
numbered as to frame and roll number so as to correspond with the frame and
roll numbered proofs.  From speaking with other commercial photographers, I
have found that commercial photographers, although beginning to shot more
negative film than before, have not typically shot negative film; when they
do, they typically do not usually get proofs made via the 4x6 proof method
but rather have the roll contact proofed. Hence they might get their film
back from the lab in strips of three and four frames depending on the format
size of the negative frame.  The same may be true for black and white films
which typically get contact proofed in contact sheets displaying rows  of
negative frames.

Wedding and portrait photographers, generally get automated prints made
using aperture cards which require that the frames be separated into single
frames for placement on the aperture cards unless of course  they have a
custom enlargement made.  The bulk of their prints generally are not custom
prints.  Commercial photographers that I know tend to separate their
transparencies into individual frames for both filing purposes as well as
for presentation to clients for approval since more often then not those
that are selected by the client for publication will be set to the printer,
who does not want the whole strip and probably would not keep it in tact
during the printing process anyway.  As for negatives, commercial
photographers, generally do not use automated aperture printing and
enlarging but go more toward custom enlargements.  It is easier to file and
keep track of the frames that are used for enlargement if one separates them
from the unused frames.  Thus, there is a practical propensity to save only
the frames that are used and toss the rejects which many times are right
next to the keepers, as well as to cut out the proof image with all the
burning and dodging, cropping, and retouching directions  from the contact
sheet for submission to the lab who is doing the custom enlargements and for
later filing with the negative frame itself.

I have no idea what the amateurs and hobbyists do.  I also do not know what
the advent of medium format scanners and digital activities has done in
terms of impact on how the practitioners who have gotten into the digital
thing handle medium format frames.

At any rate, my main point was that Minolta's implementation is not as
stupid as the original poster thought and that it was indeed grounded in a
practical reality found in the world of the professional medium format user.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Hemingway, David J
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 6:51 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: MF scanner for 120 strips


My research has shown medium format photographers use any and all methods of
storing film. Some do individual frames, individual frames in aperture
cards, some entire strips and cut what they desire and some in multiframe
strip. Not  much of a trend.
David

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurie Solomon [mailto:laurie@advancenet.net]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 6:28 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: MF scanner for 120 strips


>But it seems that one has to cut MF images into separate frames, which is
>nonsense, since MF images are also negatives which are kept in sleeves and
>not only slides in frames.

They are also much larger than 35mm and often cut for automated processing
in aperture cards anyway when returned from the lab.  Many professional
photographers who tend to be the ones who use medium format films generally
file the frames individually and not in strips like is the case for 35mm
negatives which are typically cut into strips of 4, 5, or 6 frames and not
filed as uncut 24-36 exposure frames.  By the way most medium format
transparencies are not put into mounts like 35 mm slides are since they are
generally not projected but looked at on light table;but they are cut into
separate indivdiual frames.

When you play with the big boys; you often have to play by the established
rules of their game not by the rules of some other group of player's game or
some other game. :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Tomasz Zakrzewski
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:03 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: filmscanners: MF scanner for 120 strips


Do you know if any MF scanner is capable of scanning 120 film images from
strips with 3 6x7 frames or 4 6x6 frames?
I looked at the specs of the brand new Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and
it's very promising.
But it seems that one has to cut MF images into separate frames, which is
nonsense, since MF images are also negatives which are kept in sleeves and
not only slides in frames.

Regards

Tomasz Zakrzewski

___________________________________________
fotografia - tomasz zakrzewski   www.zakrzewski.art.pl
foto@zakrzewski.art.pl