Degradation of film during processing.

[Nikon 2]

Is it true when developing film there is some degradation by processing whereas it’s avoided from a SD card directly to your computer…?

 

[koraks]

Unanswerable question. Define 'degradation'.

Let me put it differently: if you don't develop the film, you're not getting an image. So whatever 'degradation' might happen is a necessary evil.

Why do you ask?

 

[Nikon 2]

Unanswerable question. Define 'degradation'.

Let me put it differently: if you don't develop the film, you're not getting an image. So whatever 'degradation' might happen is a necessary evil.

Why do you ask?

Because I’m comparing the digital raw files with the optical print processing images and they look different. By degradation meaning a loss of detail, color and DR…!

 

[snusmumriken]

Because I’m comparing the digital raw files with the optical print processing images and they look different.

I may be the only one confused, but what exactly do you mean? You shot a film, and you are comparing raw scan files of the negatives with optical prints from the negatives; or with optical prints from the same scan files? I don't see where an SD card comes into it, unless you are talking about a digital capture. Or are you comparing the same scene shot with digital camera and film camera?

 

[Nikon 2]

I may be the only one confused, but what exactly do you mean? You shot a film, and you are comparing raw scan files of the negatives with optical prints from the negatives; or with optical prints from the same scan files? I don't see where an SD card comes into it, unless you are talking about a digital capture. Or are you comparing the same scene shot with digital camera and film camera?

My question is, during the film processing from negative to a 4x6 print, will result in a degradation otherwise absent from an SD card directly to the computer…!

 

[MattKing]

Okay - the terms you are using are really confusing. "Processing" refers to developing the film. I think you are talking about the procedures involved on creating a print from the negative or viewable/printable digital image from the negative.
I think you are asking if one optically prints from a negative, is there a loss of image information that is not encountered when one scans a negative digitally?
And the answer to that depends on the quality of both procedures, including the equipment used and knowledge and experience of the operators.
Every step taken with a negative involves some amount of loss and distortion of the information stored in the negative. Something as quick and inexpensive as that which is produced by a minilab - including an optical minilab - is unlikely to be nearly as good as something done by highly trained operators of custom professional equipment.

 

[koraks]

My question is, during the film processing from negative to a 4x6 print, will result in a degradation otherwise absent from an SD card directly to the computer…!

There's never going to be an answer to this question. At best, you'll at some point realize why the question doesn't make sense - and also why it fortunately doesn't really matter, either.

 

[Nikon 2]

My thoughts

Okay - the terms you are using are really confusing. "Processing" refers to developing the film. I think you are talking about the procedures involved on creating a print from the negative or viewable/printable digital image from the negative.
I think you are asking if one optically prints from a negative, is there a loss of image information that is not encountered when one scans a negative digitally?
And the answer to that depends on the quality of both procedures, including the equipment used and knowledge and experience of the operators.
Every step taken with a negative involves some amount of loss and distortion of the information stored in the negative. Something as quick and inexpensive as that which is produced by a minilab - including an optical minilab - is unlikely to be nearly as good as something done by highly trained operators of custom professional equipment.

My understanding is, from the negative to the final 4x6 print either optically or digitally scanned would result in a degradation of the image on the negative that doesn’t happen from an SD card going directly in the computer…!

 

[MattKing]

My thoughts


My understanding is, from the negative to the final 4x6 print either optically or digitally scanned would result in a degradation of the image on the negative that doesn’t happen from an SD card going directly in the computer…!

Perhaps.
But there is actually nothing on an SD card that will do you any good, unless you process the data in ways that will give you output that is fundamentally changed from what is on the card.
And that processing is just as capable of degrading and distorting the data on the card as the procedures necessary for getting pictures out of film.
Both approaches and technologies are wonderfully capable of capturing and distributing photos. It all turns on how you work with them.

 

[Nikon 2]

Okay - the terms you are using are really confusing. "Processing" refers to developing the film. I think you are talking about the procedures involved on creating a print from the negative or viewable/printable digital image from the negative.
I think you are asking if one optically prints from a negative, is there a loss of image information that is not encountered when one scans a negative digitally?
And the answer to that depends on the quality of both procedures, including the equipment used and knowledge and experience of the operators.
Every step taken with a negative involves some amount of loss and distortion of the information stored in the negative. Something as quick and inexpensive as that which is produced by a minilab - including an optical minilab - is unlikely to be nearly as good as something done by highly trained operators of custom professional equipment.

I couldn’t see how there wouldn’t be any degradation in the processing…!

 

[Nikon 2]

Perhaps.
But there is actually nothing on an SD card that will do you any good, unless you process the data in ways that will give you output that is fundamentally changed from what is on the card.
And that processing is just as capable of degrading and distorting the data on the card as the procedures necessary for getting pictures out of film.
Both approaches and technologies are wonderfully capable of capturing and distributing photos. It all turns on how you work with them.

Didn’t know there would be degradation from an SD card going directly to your computer…!

 

[Dali]

Pass the popcorn...

 

[Kino]

The data transferred between the SD card and the computer remains the same. How the computer program you use, with all it's LUTS and color transformations, determines if any "degradation" occurs, and YES it can happen...

 

[abruzzi]

the very act of converting raw file to a JPEG causes degradation of the image because JPEG is a lossy format. Whether that degradation is visible depends on a lot of things.

The act of scanning to a raw file can also cause degradation. Every step along the path, where one thing is converted into another--negative to raw, raw to jpeg, or negative through enlarger to photo paper, every one of those steps has the possibiity losing data in transit from one state to the next.

A lot of people that ripped their CDs (lossless) to MP3s (lossy) found that they had to go back to their CD and rip again at a higher bit rate, becasue what they thought was good enough in 1999, didn't hold up in 2010.

 

[MattKing]

There are no pictures on an SD card - just data that if you change it in the right way, you can get pictures out of the process.
Compare that with a film transparency - miniature, "perfectly" formed pictures waiting for all to see.
We are talking about storage media, where anything you do to get a final result out is going to change what is there - degraded, enhanced, totally converted into something almost unrecognizable, it is all of one.

 

[Kino]

Too many people get hung-up on "standards" and parameters; just do what satisfies your level of perfection.

Otherwise, it's all angels dancing on the head of a pin...

 

[BMbikerider]

My question is, during the film processing from negative to a 4x6 print, will result in a degradation otherwise absent from an SD card directly to the computer…!

Making a 4x6 print from a 35mm negative either colour or B&W you would be very hard pressed to see any degradation be it sharpness, grain, or colour balancer providing it is printed properly. I prefer prints from film they are to me anyway, more natural and non of the over sharpened and over saturated images.

What is the point of this question anyway, it looks as if you have already made up your mind.

 

[snusmumriken]

If you are dissatisfied with a 4x6” print when comparing it with a 4x6” image on your computer screen, you really need to change your lab or print it yourself.

 

[Prest_400]

I think the term that applies to the discussion is "Generation loss"

 

[Nikon 2]

Pass the popcorn...

If you do, will it taste the same…?

 

[Nikon 2]

I think the term that applies to the discussion is "Generation loss"

Thank you…!

 

[Nikon 2]

If you are dissatisfied with a 4x6” print when comparing it with a 4x6” image on your computer screen, you really need to change your lab or print it yourself.

The image on the computer is size 11x16 using SD card or flash drive for film…!

 

[Sirius Glass]

1. It is quite doubtful that the image would degrade on the film while the film is being developed.
2. How would one go about a scientific experiment to demonstrate it?

 

[Nikon 2]

1. It is quite doubtful that the image would degrade on the film while the film is being developed.
2. How would one go about a scientific experiment to demonstrate it?

Another good question…!

 

[Nikon 2]

the very act of converting raw file to a JPEG causes degradation of the image because JPEG is a lossy format. Whether that degradation is visible depends on a lot of things.

The act of scanning to a raw file can also cause degradation. Every step along the path, where one thing is converted into another--negative to raw, raw to jpeg, or negative through enlarger to photo paper, every one of those steps has the possibiity losing data in transit from one state to the next.

A lot of people that ripped their CDs (lossless) to MP3s (lossy) found that they had to go back to their CD and rip again at a higher bit rate, becasue what they thought was good enough in 1999, didn't hold up in 2010.

That makes sense…!