Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,054   Posts: 1,561,277   Online: 1117
      
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    I'd surely switch almost entirely to digital or color.
    That should have read "FOR color," not, "OR color."
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,699
    You missed my point completely, Ron. But I'm not the only person aware of the issue. In the practical sense, by understanding or "psycholoanalyzing" how these damn neg curves really work,
    I've been able to signficantly improve visible color reproduction. As the quality of a scan diminishes,
    the detail will actually suffer less than the ability to correctly reproduce hues. It's especially a problem with small 35mm negs and amateur scans. Hence the film get blamed. It's the SHAPE of the
    three curves RELATIVE to one another which is the issue, and how well a scan picks up the nuances
    of a curve shape. I hear goofy arguments about this all the time from the Fauxtoshop crowd; but
    if they can really fix it afterward, how come their prints always look like #@@*&!

  3. #33
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,265
    Images
    65
    Drew;

    I guess I really have no problem with most any negative or positive color film, and knowing the dye curves kinda dominates my judgement.

    PE

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,057
    Thanks Henning for explaining who "we" are in your post

    pentaxuser

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,699
    To put it a little more succintly, if the dye curves are not correctly exposed relative to one another,
    it's not only the density that's affected but the geometry one curve relative to another. So when
    push comes to shove, a less than ideal scan might pick up a very different slope at the same presumed level of exposure. Seems like a number of pro cinematographers understand my lingo exactly and have been aware of the issue with neg films in general all along. With Ektar's steeper
    curves it just gets more exaggerated. I think lots of photographers just shrug their shoulders and
    think that a muddied result is inherent to the film, whereas if it its optimized, it can become fairly
    clean. Maybe the industry was of explaining this is a little different, Ron; but I'm fairly amazed at
    how little the film mfg itself communicates other than published curves and general marketing
    applications. Glad I filter, mask, and enlarge, rather than scan.

  6. #36
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,265
    Images
    65
    Drew;

    That just sounds like crossover to me. Or perhaps interimage effects. I print optically and also scan my negatives. It depends.

    PE

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,699
    I'd call it cross-contamination on the lower part of the curve, once a particular dye layer gets geometrically pushed down due to underexposure. Analagous in effect to white light spillover in older
    subtractive enlargers, where residual unfiltered light ends up contaminating all three color layers in
    the paper and results in "mud". It's real effect regardless of scan or not, but as I said, a relatively
    poor quality scan, typically from an amateur flatbed scanner, combined with small format, is going
    to exaggerate the problem. I ran some scanning tests just to confirm this, even though I print
    optically. But when the film exp and workflow is reasonably optimized, Ektar does come closer than
    any other neg film in mimicking the cleaner hues reminiscent of chromes. And its not just a matter
    of saturation, but of curve steepness itself (which also makes it a bit more finicky than other negs).

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,699
    Postscript - by curve steepness I meant the shape of each repective dye peak, not the overall characteristic exposure curve. Sorry.

  9. #39
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,780
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by DREW WILEY View Post
    I'd call it cross-contamination on the lower part of the curve, once a particular dye layer gets geometrically pushed down due to underexposure.
    I can easily see how the exposure for blue zone V could be underexposed and end up somewhere down on the toe with what we wanted in the blue zones II to III lost or nearly devoid of any detail/color info while the exposure for red and green zone V were up where we might normally expect zone V on the curve.

    This would definitely screw up the color.

    Quote Originally Posted by DREW WILEY View Post
    Postscript - by curve steepness I meant the shape of each repective dye peak, not the overall characteristic exposure curve. Sorry.
    Not following you here at all though, are you speaking of spectral senitivity?
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    695
    Images
    3
    This thread went way over my head with all the tech details of the film, but I'll add in my layman's $.02:

    It's ok.

    As long as you like that color palate that it gives you, then it's great.
    If you don't then it's not going to be any good for you because that color palate is very distinct.

    Same can be said for Portra NC (RIP), Fuji C (RIP), Kodachrome (RIP), etc.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin