Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tina- I too thought the flatbed was the way for me, but that was because it was so easy to get a decent scan from a good print. I now have a film scanner, and a copy of Photoshop 5, and it has been almost three weeks, but I am starting to get the results I want! The learning curve for the film scanner and PS5 setup is longer, by a mile it seems at times, but the results ARE better. I spent three days at the beach, vegetating and reading printouts from the Digital Darkroom site Tim A. was so kind to tell us about, and have come to appreciate the power the film scanner and PS can give you.... likewise, while it may make for very good results, puttering around as I did before, not knowing what I was doing, can lead to some pretty miserable results! I think I am getting to the point where I am understanding the concepts, and can now make some adjustments with predictable outcomes! Gosh- the wet darkroom seems so easy now! I love the smell of fix, and the sting of the sweat as it runs into my eyes as I focus, but I am beginning to see that digital does have its place. I think that the fears of the purists are unfounded; photography didn't replace painting as an art form as so many feared. Digital will, in the end, complement rather than replace the silver based imaging systems. However- like many other endeavors- it takes time and practice to perfect. Dan - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 1999 8:34 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] digital printing - scan negs or prints? > At 01:07 PM 10/10/99 +0000, you wrote: > > >Can anybody advise me on this? What are the quality considerations between > >scanning prints and negs/trans? I was surprised when I saw the article > >arguing in favour of using 7x5 inch print scans for A3 inkjet prints > >because I had assumed that the dynamic range from a print scan would be > >significantly inferior to a film scan. > > > >Simon, > >London. > > Simon - > > I was surprised to read this, too. I've always felt that the fewer > generations you go through to the final product, the better the result will > be. Since the film is the first generation, it should give better > results. I have absolutely no complaints about my LS-2000 and do not see > how a flat scanner could possibly be better. He does say it is simpler > because he is doing all of the color and contrast adjusting before he makes > the print. I find that much easier to do with the scanning software and > Photoshop. I just finished a brochure for a company with 15 close-up > photographs of people with very different skin tones (all photographed with > the R6.2). They all come out exactly on target. I couldn't be happier! > > Tina > > > Tina Manley, ASMP > http://www.tinamanley.com >