Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/03/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 11:07 PM 3/29/98 -0500, Thomas Kachadurian wrote: >Francesco: >At 02:29 PM 3/29/98 -0800, you wrote: >>Velvia is 160/80 lpmm, Super G 100 is 125/63 lpmm, and Kodak >>Royal Gold 25 is 200/80 lpmm. Velvia is the slide film with the >>highest tested resolution, and Royal Gold 25 (AKA Ektar 25) is the >>highest resolving print film. > >Whoops, my mistake. I must have the wrong Fuji Neg film. Perhaps it is >Reala that has higher lpmm. Also, I'm getting this resolution data from the >Midwest Fuji Pro rep (not the sharpest guy). I can tell you that the neg >film makes a much better scan than Velvia from both PhotoCD and my Nikon >LS-1000. I know those from experience. > >I'm still a Velvia man, though. I just love the color palate. > >I'm no expert on permanence, but I'll bet there's one lurking here. As I >understand it, the problem is not inherent, but negative lines tend to be >less exact and more prone to contamination. Also, it seems that >manufacturers have more emphasis on permanence with slide film. > >Kodachrome is a different beast altogether. It is really a layered B&W film >and doesn't use color dyes at all. It's as close as you can get to archival. > >Tom > >> >>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.......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? >> >> > Francesco Sanfilippo, Five Senses Productions webmaster@5senses.com http://www.5senses.com/