Which method do you use to keep your film flat?
Which method do you use to keep your film flat?You’re doing something wrong.
Critical focus is important.
That includes flatness and parallel sensor and film.
For large print work, it’s important to macro and stitch. Also to take exposures at different light levels and f stops to get all the shadow information.
A good drumscan can accurately “punch” through high Dmax slide, but can also avoid blooming and veiling in shadow areas on negative.
The same can be done with camera scanning with careful technique and gefühl, without the negative impact on micro aperture scanning on ultimate resolution.
The film holder. What else? That’s the whole point.Which method do you use to keep your film flat?
Facts are facts. Numbers are numbers.
It’s an ok scanner if you look at nothing else but the results. But only that.
The second you start to look at all other factors it’s dead.
Are you in any way or shape reading what I’m writing?The results are the whole point of using an Imacon.
If you are satisfied with the results from your Epson scanner or whatever, and don’t want to go to the time, trouble, and expense of acquiring, maintaining, and using an Imacon, just say so.
Are you in any way or shape reading what I’m writing?
I have never mentioned or recommended Epson scanners, or flatbeds at all.
No of course you don’t use the cameras screen!Which is why I said “or whatever”.
With respect to scanning with a digital camera, I tried that after being dissatisfied with the results of an Epson V700, and, given my poor old tired eyes, focusing using that little screen on the back of the camera or the even smaller screen in the viewfinder was iffy. I foresee some difficulty for you accurately focusing when projecting an image from an enlarger head directly to a digital camera sensor. I used an Imacon at a workshop and was very happy with the results. They were better than either the V700 or the digital camera approach. Not that I am all that interested in scanning, but we had to because we had to share our work with others. My solution: when I shoot film, I make analog prints. It eliminates scanning. I find the whole idea that digital sucks or is at least inauthentic except when you scan film and post it to the internet or make inkjet prints ludicrous.
So you don’t want a computer involved?For an analog photographer, you sure do have a lot of digital stuff involved in your workflow.
So you don’t want a computer involved?
We are talking about scanning here.Not with film. For digital it is obviously required.
I was discussing my experience with scanning. My experience with scanning is that if you want to shoot film, you are better off making analog prints if what you are after is the analog aesthetic. If you want to scan, I liked the results of the Imacon better than both the Epson V700 and using a digital camera as a scanner.We are talking about scanning here.
Oh, in that you are right.I was discussing my experience with scanning. My experience with scanning is that if you want to shoot film, you are better off making analog prints if what you are after is the analog aesthetic. If you want to scan, I liked the results of the Imacon better than both the Epson V700 and using a digital camera as a scanner.
I was discussing my experience with scanning. My experience with scanning is that if you want to shoot film, you are better off making analog prints if what you are after is the analog aesthetic. If you want to scan, I liked the results of the Imacon better than both the Epson V700 and using a digital camera as a scanner.
or use it for a book you’ll not want to scan a print.
You know, no matter how many times I tape a print to my monitor, no one has ever seen it. So other than stroking it in your cave, and calling it your precious, how do you let other people see your prints?
Some do.
That depends on whether you want a flat neutral file to use and manipulate.A print scan, if done well, using an appropriate scanner, can be incredibly good. The only significantly better approach is high quality art repro using cross-polarisation etc.
The most exquisite photographs I think I’ve seen were hand-tinted daguerreotypes.Never met an "analog photographer" in my life... We, mammal photographers, love how film captures light. Once we have the negative game's over. From that point your responsibility is to NOT FUCK IT UP. If you print it on paper, you fucked it up. Did not scan properly? Fucked it up. etc. Just master how to transfer it from the negative into your retina. That's what computers are for.
He’s just a benign sea lion. I’m done with the subject.Why are you people feeding this troll?
He's being a dick, just to be a dick, and derail the conversation. Congrats, you've helped him. The entire second page had nothing to do with helping OP.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?