Thread: Film scanners?
View Single Post
  #159  
Old April 22nd 17, 04:25 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Film scanners?

On 2017-04-22 03:01:44 +0000, Ken Hart said:

On 04/21/2017 06:45 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

I have to disagree with Mr Bill W's first paragraph. When developing the
film, artistry and trial & error should usually be somewhere down the
hall! The goal is to be able to get predictable results on the film.

That said, there may be times when you have to break the rules in film
developing to get any results at all: most typically push or pull
processing.

Once you have the best possible negative in your enlarger, then the
artistry starts: burning in or dodging, color balance, contrast, etc.

Thank you for your respect of the craft. But I don't find it hard (maybe
because I don't use a "bathroom darkroom"!), and a well printed, mounted
and framed enlargement gives me a sense of achievement.

Fair enough, but it's not the process I disagree with, it's the
claimed output quality of the process.

I have prints (typically 20"x24") hanging that I've shoot on either
35mm, 6x6, or 645 and optically printed


all of which could be done with a digital camera, with noticeably
better results.

that I will stack up against an
equivalent digital print- not a screen image, but an actual
print-on-paper, framed and hanging on the wall.


you will lose.


Show me. I'm in southwest IN, near I64 & I69. Bring some of your 20x24
enlargements and we'll put them next to mine.


Good luck with that. We have yet to see any evidence that he shoots
anything, digital or film.
....but he knows more than all of us combined.
--
Regards,

Savageduck