Re: [Leica] slide vs. print film for PhotoCD

["Jeff S" <segawa@netone.com>]

- -----Original Message-----
From: Five Senses Productions <fls@5senses.com>
>I never knew this.....I always was taught that slide film would present the
>better quality enlagement and scan.  For these reasons I put up with the
>inconvenience of slides.  I would be head over heels if I found a print
film
>that scanned better and enlarged better than Velvia! I think Royal Gold
>25 may do it

For those times when color's needed, I've been thinking of switching to
print film: I love what my slides look like when viewed on the light box or
projected (can anyone tell me if $500 for a clean used Pradovit 2500 w/90
Colorplan a killer deal??) but aside from some very low-contrast scenes,
which use texture and color for differentiation, I have seldom been stunned
by the wonderfulness of my prints-from-slides, or anyone else's, for that
matter. I look forward to the day when I can produce a high-noon photo which
properly conveys a feeling of brilliant light and even hazy summer heat
without simply looking washed-out!

I'll get my test PhotoCD of scanned RG 25 negs back
>on Monday afternoon.
>
>If both are stored under optimum conditions, how much longer than
>negatives do slides last?
>
Maybe I've just grown spoiled or something, but it seems to me that KR64
images made in the late '70s and early '80s look more magenta than I like,
and that Ektachromes (EPN?) from the era are bluish to the extent that
today, I might want to use something a bit stronger than a skylight filter
:-) Most of the time, these were stored in warm, humid conditions, which has
since been upgraded to warm and DRY!

Jeff