Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/10/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Likewise, the 1600 in Neopan 1600 is pure marketing. ;) TMZ is about 1000 speed film, Delta 3200 is a hair faster, and Neopan is slower. I've heard around 600. All these films get contrasty at their box speeds because they are all being pushed. That being said, I rather like TMZ at 1600 and 3200. It's better 1600... Tim On Oct 27, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote: > I think TMZ at 3200 sucks. The 3200 speed is pure marketing, with no > relation to reality. Try Fuji Neopan 1600 (at 1600) instead. Much > better for scanning. > > Cheers, > Nathan > > Nathan Wajsman > Alicante, Spain > http://www.frozenlight.eu > http://www.greatpix.eu > http://www.nathanfoto.com > > Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 > PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws > Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog > > > > On Oct 26, 2008, at 11:53 PM, Geoff Hopkinson wrote: > >> Douglas B, >> There are several factors there, I think. >> You are scanning half of a 35mm frame >> You have used a high speed and very grainy film >> The light is soft, lower and low contrast >> The featureless sky will always emphasise grain >> Scanning BW film can emphasise the grain as well. >> You can't use any grain reducing software on scanned BW film (not >> the CN >> emulsions) >> Scanning with a flatbed cannot capture as much range as a dedicated >> scanner >> anyway. >> >> I think that you are expecting too much from the little camera in >> those >> circumstances. >> I've never tried any half-frame. I bought two of the more modern >> Olympus >> 35mm compacts with the fixed 35mm lens (for my kids to learn with), >> as I >> thought the lens would be better than a little zoom. I was very >> disappointed. In the 70's I sold hundreds of the classic Trip 35 >> and I don't >> remember anyone being disappointed in the results quality. Maybe my >> memory >> has faded. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> Geoff >> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/e >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/ >> Maike Harbets speaks on the S2. .... So we will drop down this >> technology to >> our other systems. >> Our priority is to modernise the R system which will be in the end >> an R10, >> definitely. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org >> [mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On >> Behalf Of >> Douglas Barry >> Sent: Monday, 27 October 2008 07:35 >> To: lug@leica-users.org >> Subject: [Leica] Olympus Pen Ft >> >> Following the recnt posts on the Pen F and its lens quality, I went >> out an >> shot off a roll of Kodak P3200TMAX using my PenFT. Scanning the >> negs in >> using my Epson 3200, I was astonished to see the level of grain and >> lack of >> clarity in the images. This is an example. >> >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/DouglasBray/kiosc2.jpg.html >> >> What am I doing wrong, or do these smaller negative images have to be >> enlarged and printed chemically to get a better quality before the >> prints >> are scanned? The only other roll of film I ran through the Pen FT >> was a C41 >> colour roll which I gave to a minilab to be developed and printed. >> The >> prints turned out fine. >> >> Any suggestions gratefully received. >> >> Douglas >> _________ >> Douglas Barry >> Bray, Co. Wicklow >> Republic of Ireland >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information