[filmscanners] Re: Scanning negs vs. slides

["Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>]

Dave writes:

> I exposed both at ISO 100 using the "sunny 16"
> rule ...

But isn't Portra ISO 160?

> The long and short of it is tonality and
> color looked very similar after corrections.

I think that today, with the ability to scan and change all sorts of things
after the fact, the differences between slide and negative film are far less
important.  As you say, after correcting them, they both look very much the
same.  In fact, I often cannot tell the difference in scans after I've
forgotten the original conditions of their creation.

In the olden days, it mattered a lot more, because you couldn't just correct
curves in an image with a flick of a mouse, and slide film in particular had
to look good as-is, since it was being projected.

I still tend to like slide film, though, even if the final results can be
nearly indistinguishable from negative film.  Also, my slides come back a
lot cleaner from the labs than the C-41 stuff.

> The Provia scan held extreme highlight detail
> the neg scan blew out, but the neg scan seemed
> to have slightly better highlight detail slightly down
> scale.

It sounds like you might have overexposed the Portra, however, if you
exposed both for ISO 100.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body