[Clarkey]

Snip...
Positive images from color negative films are like translations of Japanese to English, which are almost never perfect translations.

Great quote!

Within limits...

My experience with scanned film is that the latitude for modification is a little worse than with a digital capture JPEG and nowhere near what can be accomplished with a RAW capture*. This is even true with 16-bit TIFF output. For many films, scans are just simply "brittle" in PP where the usual approaches result in nasty artifact or amplification of grain and/or color cast. This is particularly true when attempting to increase contrast, sharpness, or color saturation. I figure it has something to do with the low-level heterogeneity of the scan and of the negative itself.

Snip...

+1 on the nasty artifacts when performing tone curve adjustment - the thicker/more dense the emulsion, the worse it gets! Still, scanning does get around many of the basic exposure errors.

Some Reala (Fuji 645):

Windsor statues by clarke_ag, on Flickr

and some Kodak gold 100 (I'm pretty sure...):


Makaroa Beach by clarke_ag, on Flickr

[LesDMess]

My experience has been that even a good scan of a good negative/slide with a decent scanner is harder to work with than a similar straight digital capture. Medium and large format are much easier due to the luxury of lower scan resolutions, but with 35mm things get ugly quickly. Of course, maybe I am just picky.

OTOH...for color work, I would much rather scan + PP than muddle with a C or R print in the darkroom.


Steve

No doubt we all come from very different levels, experiences and expectations. They are all good . . .

[cooltouch]

Well, Costco always did a good job with my C-41 developing but its a moot point now, since they don't develop film anymore. Just about all I have left in the way of a halfway decent lab now is the local pro lab. Incidentally, the Ektar I was referring to was properly exposed, and the earth tones scanned as purple, not magenta. No matter, I've come to prefer Portra 160 over Ektar 100 anyway. So far it's been more friendly toward scans and dupes than Ektar.

[Jonathan Mac]

Browns scanning as purples is one of the most common colour problems with scanning film, and it's not limited to Ektar. I have a stash of Fujicolor 100, which is quite a good film, but it often has this problem. I'm not saying it's caused by the film though, it's just as likely to be caused by my scanner (an Epson V500), which gets the colours right around 5% of the time.

All this renewed talk of colour film has reminded me I currently have three cameras loaded with B&W but none with colour. I'll need to rectify that.

[bibz]

The software I have with my v700 makes all colour stuff really easy to deal with. Worst case scan as positive and photoshop it up! The problem comes with automation, or a one set profile for all scans. I shoot raw digitally and would never run the same exact settings twice, so same with film. A great 6x7 frame is worth the hassle to me to get right! This shot has a lot of blue tinting in it...because thats what reflected off the clearcoat paint. Colours are more real/pure when captured by film.

[rob1234]

Only shot 2 rolls of it ever, but I was pleased at how easy to scan Ektar was and thought the colours were good:



Z-1P
DA35/2.4
Ektar 100
Canon FS4000 scan

[Swift1]

Voigtlander Bessa R
CV Color-Skopar 35/2.5
Lomography Color 400
Epson V500

[Jonathan Mac]

The software I have with my v700 makes all colour stuff really easy to deal with. Worst case scan as positive and photoshop it up! The problem comes with automation, or a one set profile for all scans. I shoot raw digitally and would never run the same exact settings twice, so same with film. A great 6x7 frame is worth the hassle to me to get right! This shot has a lot of blue tinting in it...because thats what reflected off the clearcoat paint. Colours are more real/pure when captured by film.

That shot has wonderful colours and light, a nice 3D feel due to the shallow depth of field too.

[skierd]

I I know some people love Fuji superia for some reason, I can't stand it.

I have to stand corrected, just got a roll back from the lab that I used for a studio shoot with kids on campus and I loved it when used with a strobe (yes I have permission to use and share).




Wasn't so bad under fluorescents either given that it's a daylight film




and I was happy with the results converting to black and white.



I'd definitely use it again in a studio setting. Still prefer Ektar for outside (which wasn't great in studio:




Hopefully I can get some Porta 160 from B&H before the semester ends to try, or stop down and try Portra 400 that I have.

[Swift1]

I have to stand corrected, just got a roll back from the lab that I used for a studio shoot with kids on campus and I loved it when used with a strobe (yes I have permission to use and share).

The more I use Superia 400, the more impressed I am with it. It's quite good for a consumer grade 400 speed film. It can be a bit tricky to scan as it seems to have that Fuji purple cast.

Contax G2
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 35/2
Fujicolor Superia 400
Epson V500

[Jacquot]

The more I use Superia 400, the more impressed I am with it. It's quite good for a consumer grade 400 speed film. It can be a bit tricky to scan as it seems to have that Fuji purple cast.

Contax G2
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 35/2
Fujicolor Superia 400
Epson V500

Nice motion with the furniture, and color! G2 is doing you well. I'd say.

[Swift1]

Nice motion with the furniture, and color! G2 is doing you well. I'd say.

Thanks David. The Contax works pretty good for blind shooting

[hoopsontoast]

MZ-S / Voigtlander 58mm f1.4 Nokton / Fuji Provia 100F




Viv with the FA43




And again with the 58mm Nokton

[Cuthbert]

I shot my first decent roll of Portra of the season with my mighty K2DMD and K50 mm f1.4 and the M200 f4.0, pretty pleased with the results,even if the 200mm is not the greatest lens I've tried...some highlights:

Pinnacle:



On the road:



The frog and the child:



An interesting tree:



Chick:



I like this F-104:



Transformer:



Cabinet:



Guzzi cafe' racer:

[aurele]

MZ-S / Voigtlander 58mm f1.4 Nokton / Fuji Provia 100F




Viv with the FA43




And again with the 58mm Nokton

Do you remember the aperture used ?