So I will be posting more of the Print scan vs. Negative scan comparisons. Most of us film users scan the negative and post that directly. But as I make prints I want to revisit some of these and see whether you can tell the difference between the scanned negative vs. the scanned print. What does the actual printing add to the process?
Above the scanned negative. Below the scanned 8X10 print. Which do you prefer and why?
Now granted the scanning process itself tends to homogenize things. But there are subtle differences that make me prefer the print scan.
That is a hard choice. The neg. has a more dramatic sky. The print has better detail in the mountains especially the one in the foreground.
ReplyDeleteI go for the print.
Nice photo. There might be a touch more contrast in the scanned neg, which leads to blocking up a large area of highlights in the clouds, at least the way the image is displayed on my laptop, which I admit is in need of calibration. There is a small area of highlight blocking up in the upper right corner of the scanned print, but good detail in the rest of the clouds, which is why i would prefer that image.
ReplyDeleteAfter looking at this again this morning I notice that I missed the detail in the tree. The tree in the scanned print looks like it has better detail, especially in the branches, than the negative.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure by manipulation of the digital image or a bit of dodging and burning in the darkroom both could be made very much alike where only viewing with a magnifier of each print would show any differences.
Great!
ReplyDeleteYou are both seeing exactly what I saw. The negative scan has more contrast; the print hs more detail especially in the mountains in the background. Very subtle differences. Either image would be acceptable as a matter of taste or preference.
I don't do much manipulation in Photoshop. I only play with the contrast when I am posting negative scans. So I probably raised the contrast of the negative before I posted it. hat's my tendency.