Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 9 - skiing snapshots
From: "Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@hfx.andara.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 13:52:33 -0400
References: <3C84F70A.87238E5@webshuttle.ch>

B.D.:

I have been told that the best way to judge how a slide will look printed 
is to hold it in front of a white sheet of paper and view it via the 
reflected light from the paper.  This of course applies if you are not an 
Ilfochrome Guru shooting 4x5 and using highlight and shadow masks when 
printing.  A 35mm slide is tough to make these masks for and still hold 
them in registration.

Regards,

Robert

At 11:35 AM 3/5/2002 -0500, B. D. Colen wrote:
>But Robert, the slide looks just fine on the light table! This is just an
>example of the fact that even a fairly decent scanner like my Nikon LS-2000
>cannot cope well with slides that have a very wide range. You'll have to
>take
>my word for it, the slide looks beautiful when projected or laid on the
>light
>table.
>
>Nathan
>--
>
>I wonder if the scanner is really the problem, Nathan. The real question
>here is; how does the slide look when printed? Many slides look terrific on
>the light table or projected, but don't quite cut it when it's time to
>print. You might well find when printing that you run into the same problem
>you did when scanning - your daughter my be just enough underexposed to make
>getting a really good print - or scan - impossible, even though she and the
>photo look great on the screen or with light streaming through the slide on
>the light table.
>
>B. D.
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch> (Re: [Leica] Nathan's PAW 9 - skiing snapshots)