Post processing was not an option and impossible in one hour lab,
especially consider you have hundreds of photos back from a trip with
your family. Ok, it is much better now with computer, scanner and
cheap digital lab output, you can do anything you want and it can be
very fast for a simple color/contrast editing, a low or high contrast
lens is not an issue now. But if using normal negative and direct one
hour lab output I prefer other lenses.
C.H.Ling
"John A. Lind" wrote:
Contrast levels can be controlled by lighting and how it's employed to
either deepen or fill shadow. Some might object to its sharpness
(partially a function of its contrast), but that can also be modified.
Personally, I'd rather have a lens that excels in these criteria and then
work to tone them down if that's desired. It is impossible to increase
these if they don't already exist in the optics.
> -- John
Although I like contrasty lenses too, sometimes I like to use the
35-70/3.6 too. It has a nice look. And I do like to look directly
at the slides from time to time.
My limited experience with scanning is that a lower contrast slide or
negative is much easier to handle and preserves more detail than a
high contrast one. If you are working in an optical-chemical
darkroom it may be true that you cannot get back contrast that is
lost in the lens, but I don't think that is true with an electronic
darkroom.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|