Thoughts on the perfect scan - is it that important?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Rich42 Senior Member • Posts: 1,501
Re: Agree for B&W

Olifaunt wrote:

Neil-O wrote:

Sifting through colour negative prints has been a deflating experience. Almost without exception I find the scanned negatives, on reflection, to be a poor representation. It makes no difference whether it's a lab scan or my own, comparing scanned negatives to chromogenic prints is just no contest.

This is true.

The trigger for me to go back to film 3 years ago was one day when I stumbled upon my long-ignored stacks of envelopes of my old wet prints from the 90s.

In those prints I saw lifelike color, tone, and dynamic range that I hadn't seen in my digital images in 15 years.

Then you need to seriously have your digital camera repaired or seriously check your technique. I've spent a career processing film, and your experience is quite unusual re digital quality vs film.

I used a cheap point and shoot and never thought for a second about exposure except for fill-in flash. A good lab did the rest. Back then you discarded pictures because someone's eyes were closed or something, because technically they were all pretty much guaranteed to be fine.

You can get a some of this back in good scans. Never quite exactly, because they will for the most part be sRGB (smaller gamut) and displays are not paper, but still usually pleasing. It is hard to find labs today that will give you scans as good as those prints were in the 90s. And to get good scans at home, you really need a good eye.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow