![]() Don't even get me started on the fallacy that is RAW digital shooting. I spend way less time processing my film results from TDP than I ever did in 10+ years of shooting digital. Finally, TDR does my basic post-processing for me: exposure adjustments, color balancing. My overexposed film is developed at box speed (not pulled), which results in denser-than-usual-negatives, which requires density adjustments for my scans. TDR knows how I shoot they process my film accordingly. My baseline is +1EC, and adjust from there. Color negative film has at a truck-load of overexposure tolerance. More benefits of paying (TDR) to do my scanning. Paying $5 per roll saves me 3 hours of work? SOLD! On top of that, I get better scans than I could ever get at home. If I allow 5 minutes per frame, I have devoted from 1 to 3 hours to EACH ROLL OF FILM, and I've done nothing with regard to post-processing yet. Plain and simple: paying a professional to use professional-grade equipment will always yield better results than I (me, not necessarily you) can get at home. What I do want is the best results I can get from the gear I am using. I have no desire to spend my time scanning 12 (6圆) to 36 (35mm) frames for each roll of film I shoot. Doing your own scanning, like every other endeavor, is a series of compromises. One of the great savings of paying someone else to scan my negatives is that I have way less post-processing to do. That is why I pay someone else to do my scanning. I like to do my own post-processing, also. I'd not even heard of Reflecta so thanks for adding another to my list of potentials.Emphasis above is mine. I do like to do my own post-pro so definitely aim to get setup with my own scanner. I've had some lab scanned work and it's been good, but expensive in these parts (UK) for higher-res stuff. Thanks a lot for the replies and details. Remember that the file size will appear much smaller until you open it up in an image editing program like Photoshop. Super Scans are 4492×6774 pixels or 87.1 MB when opened in an image editing program like Photoshop. Our new, super scan is perfect for those who want professional resolution or to never worry if you have enough resolution for current and future projects.nnIt works very well for advertising, giant prints and large posters.nnScan Sizes 35mm Film – 4492×6774 pixels – 87.1 mb Medium Format 645 – 3533×4824 pixels – 48.8 mb Medium Format 6×6 – 4760×4760 pixels – 64.8 mb Medium Format 6×7 – 4815×5902 pixels – 81.3 mb Super Scan is $5 more than what I am paying. I suppose if I knew I were printing large (8x10 and larger), I'd pay the extra few $$ for higher resolution. For mostly 4圆, 5x7, and the occasional 8x10, 2700x2000 works quite well. Not worth it when I'm shooting 3 rolls a month. The main thing is that you're happy with the results for the price you pay.I paid more for higher resolution scan on a couple of rolls. ![]() However for medium format that seems relatively small pixel dimensions. That would seem to indicate a relatively low compression factor. That JPG filesize for that pixel size is not unreasonable. It doesn't appear that they apply much color/contrast adjustments or over sharpening which are not uncommon with minilabs.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |