Well, I find that any scan of a print falls far short of the quality of image from a negative or slide scan, and that is what I post in my gallery. No one has complained yet.
As for a scan of a negative, then the dmin and slope of the negative curve determine the dmax of the positive image you obtain. However, the Dmax of the positive is adjustable by the scanner software, and this is because of the variations in negatives, and the "color" of the B&W negative image that can be obtained.
So, the bottom line is that with good software, the Dmax of just about all scans can be adjusted to be the same. In terms of darkroom work, this is the equivalent to increasing exposure and contrast. This may indicate that the films are over or under developed. It is impossible to say without tests though.
You probably used the drum scanner in the graphic arts industry. There, a Dmax of 4.0 is common and desirable. At least when it comes to film used for platemaking. My densitometer can display 6.0 densities but I doubt the precision of these high density readings.
In pictorial photography, using black and white negatives, it's not necessary to build great density. Density of 1.5 is going to make white on the print. You do not need the highest Dmax.
A 100 speed film in your Zeiss Ikon Nettar will have an advantage over 400 speed film in some cases for obvious logical reasons: The finer grain. You get to take advantage of this if you use a high shutter speed, flash or a tripod. But if you walk and shoot casual snapshots in average conditions, I think a 400 speed film will really give better pictures because you will not have as much camera shake.
Thank you for helping hand , I am quite understood.
I always posted negative scans done at Gretag Printer. I dont know why but color scans resist to my process attemps with softwares and whatever I do , result is worse. I did few attemps and put to the gallery but they are shame.
My softwares are online photo editors and people use it to put a christmas tree or smiling mickey to the pictures :)
I am waiting an lightmeter from New Mexico and I believe in what optical designer accomplished and what kodak , agfa engineers accomplished for normal development and exposure.
I thought Rollei ATP and Rodinal 1/150 is the closest thing to Zeiss Triotar pictures and I have a triplet also and the most extreme thing I will do to take acutance to extreme by this way.
Other thing is HC110 high dilution development on Tri X and above and below have similar results .
I dont have a scanner and I will go to the lab and use their desktop scanner.
DMAX on the dr5 site or the 'filmreview' pages refers to the blackest areas of the films. In other words, where there isn't any image - to put it simply. The films run in dr5 are processed as transparencies/slides. DMAX is used in all measurement of transparencies, be they B&W or color.
How DMAX is used in other areas of photography is different.
DMAX when you are talking about transparencies is important, the people watching a slide show see how rich the slides are. A low DMAX in a projected slide looks muddy or washed out.
(Compare this to printing from negatives where you choose the contrast of printing paper to make blacks richer).
There are two types of Dmax.
Absolute Dmax is the highest value density a given photo product will give in a development condition that forms silver metal from silver halide. An example would be treatment in sodium sulfide solution which reduces the silver halide to silver metal. This can range from 3.0 - 5.0
Effective Dmax is the Dmax obtained in any given developer in which the curve and speed are optimum for the film. These two may differ by a substantial amount. This is usually 3.0 - 4.0
There is a third type, related only to print materials, in which Dmax is governed by the reflective support itself and this value is always limited to a maximum value by nature of the reflective material itself and not the amount of silver formed, nor by development. It is usually between 1.8 and 2.2.