A couple of years of reading this list hs convinced me that both ease of
use and quality of results in scanning film are highly variable across
hardware, software and wetware. Film scanning is not a mature consumer
technology like bicycles, automobiles, water faucets, door knobs, etc.,
where virtually anyone fimiliar with the operation of some examples can
readily use different examples with fully satisfactory results.
Some of us report that slides are easier than negs. Others report that
negs are easy, but slides 'impossible', and so on. The basic process,
reading light intensity of 3 colors, is inherently neutral to whether
the subject is a positive or negative image of the light reflected from
some scene elsewhere in space-time, scrawlings on a piece of clear
plastic, coffee stains on newspaper, etc. etc.
Some observations from my experience and reading about the experiences
of others:
It seems likely to me that all curent, major brand scanners are capable
of equal quality results from either form of film.
The time to make one scanning pass is the same for either form of film.
Noise in the dark areas of finished scans/prints is more
noticable/annoying than in the light areas. Thus slides are more
sensitive to scanner noise at high source densities than are negs. and
may require more scanning passes or lower noise scanners to produce
visually equal results from scenes with substantial very dark areas. On
my particular scanner, slides with dark areas may take longer than negs
because of the need for multiple passes. This is apparently less of an
issue with some of the latest scanners.
The software that runs the scanner can make a big difference in results.
Vuescan gives better results with my scanner than the software provided
with it.
Preferrences and predjudices often affect how people perceive the world.
Two people using the same hardware and software may experience the
process and results quite differently:
A person who is emotionally predisposed to feel slides are superior may
be perfectly happy spending several hours learning how to get excellent
scanning results from slides and feel rewarded by the effort. Presented
with the need to scan negative film, towards which he/she has
emotionally negative feelings, a few minutes spent learning to get the
(possibly unconsciously) expected unsatisfactory results may lead to the
emotionally satisfying conclusion that negs are harder to scan and give
poorer results. The reverse scenario will be played out by other
individuals. Although speculative as to any one of us, these kinds of
factors underly enormous portions of human behavior. Without them the
whole business of branding and advertising would be almost
unrecognizably different.
Moose
William Clark wrote:
I get better results with slides, which makes the difference for me. If I
am going to spend time doing this stuff, then I want the best result
possible with minimal troubles. You are right though, it is just as ardous,
but my experience is better with slides (quicker)
< 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 >
|