Re: Does MF color slides scanning in 24 bit still make sense
Re: Does MF color slides scanning in 24 bit still make sense
- Subject: Re: Does MF color slides scanning in 24 bit still make sense
- From: Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:26:26 +0000
> On 20 Jan 2016, at 01:11, Mike Strickler <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Hi Martin. You know t's a funny thing, but grain does also get smoothed out quite a bit by the scanning oil. The effect is obvious when you look at the image inside an air bell (usually caused by some tiny particle lifting up the film around it. That part, which has no fluid on it, is definitely grainier looking, even when it's color negative film, which has no light-scattering silver grains and thus no Callier effect. I concluded that the minute swellings of the emulsion surface where silver grains had been before being bleached out are sufficient to scatter a bit of light, much as scratches do. Another good reason to wet-mount the film.
I’m not convinced about that theory Mike :)
Repairing air bubbles is a regular task, especially around the bite marks in 5x4, but darkening the bubble area (or lightening on neg) and then removing the edge is normally sufficient for a seamless repair. I don’t recall any occasion where we’ve had to soften the image because it has been more grainy after the curve correction? Although this may be because 99% of our scanning is from colour originals?
Not sure that the Callier Effect applies to the benefits of oil mounting anyhow? The drum light source is fixed.
Oil mounting ensures that light isn’t scattered as it travels through the negative or transparency.
Under *any* backlighting source, oil mounted negs have more depth and contrast than dry mounted negs.
Regards
--
Martin Orpen
Idea Digital Imaging Ltd
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden