He has reduced the sharpening to a modest level,
Why reduce the sharpness?
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Pearce
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 10:18 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] negative films, minilabs, etc.........
Recently, my pro lab owning friend added a Konica digital printer. He
showed
me the available control, how it was set up by the Konica rep, and what
he
changed to get good results. This was my first upclose experience with
one
of these things, and I now know a lot more about why some prints are so
bad
on these things.
There is a screen full of adjustments that can be made. Some of the more
interesting ones are for sharpness, saturation, and contrast. Yes,
contrast.
That's why that carefully exposed roll of 160NC came out looking like
Agfa
Ultra 50. The machines are set up by the reps for general minilab film
(not
the brand, but the subjects and exposures), and that's not good for us.
His customers are either pros or advanced amateurs. He has reduced the
sharpening to a modest level, set the saturation to a level that most
closely reproduces what's on the film, and set for normal contrast. The
results for you and me are quite good. The results of a rank amateur
poorly
exposed roll, or something from a disposable, are not so hot.
This gets back to my old song: If you shoot expensive cameras, good
film,
fancy lenses, and take great care with your work, don't expect to get
good
results from a drugstore minilab. They set up their equipment a certain
way
for a reason.
Bill Pearce
< 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 >
< 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 >
|