Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ok....there's poor technique, and then there's POOR technique. I'm talking about those negatives (I have a bunch) that appear to have all the information there, but simply can't be printed easily, because of the huge range of densities present in the negative. For instance,I have a shot taken near Clearwater, British Columbia in the middle of nowwhere showing both the sky at twilight, beautiful reflections of the sky in the water, and deep shadows in the surrounding forest. There is shadow detail visible in the forest (visible in the negative), but I have never been able to show it in a print and still differentiate the tones in the sky (I'm certain that it is possible with a lot of grunt work). I'm certain that the negative will scan and print more easily than using traditional darkroom techniques. Dan C. At 12:14 AM 05-05-00 +0800, ray tai wrote: >The limitation is with the negative and the information in it, right? If the >enlarger lens cannot "read" the details in the negative because of underexposure >or severe overexposure can a scanner do better? Poor technique is poor >technique unless you completely bypass the negative and shoot on some medium that >can hold 30 zones of information. >