Good Color Neg. Films

[pmagwene]

Howdy Y'All,

Does anybody have any recommendations for color negative films that scan particularly well with SilverFast AI 5.5 and a Polaroid Sprintscan 4000?

I've so far only tried Kodak Gold 200, with rather poor results. My main complaint is that scans of this film have lots of noise in the blues (especially noticable in the sky).

Anybody tried anything that made 'em really sit up and take notice?

Thanks,
Paul Magwene

[ianders1]

Paul,

I can't speak for negative films, others will, but as far as transparency film, I've found nothing that equals Fuji Provia and Velvia. Velvia has more contrast and less shadow detail, and Provia is fairly neutral. Both have such fine film grain that you'll be hard pressed to see it in anything less than an 8000dpi scan. That's what works best for me. Negative film is more forgiving, however, and with NegaFix, I may do some more experimenting with whatever negative film the other Ian and others on this forum might recommend.

-Ian A.

[pmagwene]

I've also found Provia and Velvia to be excellent. Those are my two standards. Now if I could only find a negative film that scans well (without spending a small fortune testing all the different films on the market).

I'm suprised there have been no other responses here. Doesn't anybody regularly scan negative films, or do we all stick to E6?

--Paul

[ilyons]

Negative film is more forgiving, however, and with NegaFix, I may do some more experimenting with whatever negative film the other Ian and others on this forum might recommend.

I don't use negative type film often enough to make a qualified recommendation. Even with Negafix the results are in my opinion less satisfactory than Provia 100F.

Ian Lyons

[RFinefrock]

Has anyone tried Kodak Supra 100 negative film? I heard it supposed to be good for scanning. I have not yet tried it myself.

RF

[Guest]

perfectly agree with them experts on pos. film!(tell us more of ur experiences in the future!)
i have experienced ALL neg films.
>>>precise exposure<<<+-1/3 stops will yield great results, both neg scans on nikon and sprint scan is professional publication qualities!

[Guest]

You can try Kodak Royal 100. I've gotten decent results with it.

[xander]

I cannot comment on the Sprinscan, but I own a LS4000 and LS2000, and can say that since Negafix alot has changed.
My best scan results I get with Fuji films, while before Negafix and still with Nikonscan Kodak scanned better, the Gold, Royal Gold etc.
But with Negafix Lasersoft did a nice job. The new Fuji 4th colorlayer films, like Reala, and Superia(I'am not sure about the NPH and NPS)were very hard to scan to "professional" results. A lot of scans gave nasty Magenta casts, and were very hard to correct, the 400asa's were the worst. Funny was that the older emulsions, lets say before the "4th colorlayer" scanned without any problem on the LS4000 (LS2000 always needs more work)with SF5.2 and Nikonscan.

With Negafix its a blessing, the new emulsion scan very nice, although the first not public version of SF5.5 had wrong profiles, it seems that the RAW scans from Nikonscanners are more red compared to other scanners, with this corrected these "4th color layer" emulsions scan very good. There color fidelity is very good, and they have a much finer grain compared to the consumer films from the other brands. I'am very surprised about the Superia Xtra 400, this is a consumer film with very nice skintones and nice cool colours, nothing overdone like Kodak!

One thing could be better with Negafix on my Nikonscanners, I suspect that all profiles are corrected afterwards for the raw scan which is redder on the Nikons, but the result is, that not all the profiles are consitent(with some profiles you have to increase the exposure much more then others)
These profiles need tweaking for the Nikonscanners!

But anyone who thinks negative scanning to a very high standard is easy, will still be disappointed, even with Negafix it still needs quiet some work, but can be done, no problem!!

Xander

ps. Is there anyone who can comment on AGFAchrome, I find them very hard to scan, while all the Fujichrome scan very good (don't know about any Kodak), no matter what scanning software is used.

[ilyons]

On 2001-11-09 09:47, xander wrote:

ps. Is there anyone who can comment on AGFAchrome, I find them very hard to scan, while all the Fujichrome scan very good (don't know about any Kodak), no matter what scanning software is used.

AgfaChrome is okay and Ektachrome is really easy (a bit like FujiChrome). As for Kodachrome - I'll leave that to those who use it.

Ian L

[ianders1]

I agree with Ian - the Kodak negative films all seem very difficult to scan, with the exception of Kodak Gold and Max. Their Pro films are extremely difficult to get the colors right, even with Negafix. I have some shots on Porta 160 VC, that I have never been able to scan in very well. I seem to get some of the colors looking correct, only to completely distort others.

Also, Ian's right about transparency film being much easier to scan and to get a good image from. If like to have prints made, it's less convenient, but for most of us, we just drop it at the photomat and have the do "Processing Only" for about $2US, and then take it home and cut and scan it. Then, once the image is perfect, we make our own prints on our Epson Photo Printers. Not ideal for family snapshots, but for landscapes and commercial work, that's what most of us do.

-Ian A.

[Doug_Robertson]

On 2001-11-09 09:47, xander wrote:

One thing could be better with Negafix on my Nikonscanners, I suspect that all profiles are corrected afterwards for the raw scan which is redder on the Nikons, but the result is, that not all the profiles are consitent(with some profiles you have to increase the exposure much more then others)
These profiles need tweaking for the Nikonscanners!

Don't want to harp on about this idea, but this is exactly the problem I was describing in the thread about color management. If the Nikon scanners are redder than others, then they need to be profiled first before the data is fed to the next stage of processing. Only then can a standard color basis be passed to the Negafix processing. This applies to brands of scanner, and between individual units of the same type.

Am I nuts, or does anyone else see what I'm talking about?

Doug

[Guest]

redder magneta casts are difficult(could be not worth the time to correct if u have say another scanner like the sprint scan other than a nikon ls2000)
mitsubishi, royal gold, max400 turns out pretty cool(similiar profile maybe?).
When i use agfa chrome and agfa optima, i always try +2/3stops and results are great. professional film demands professional attention,

[Guest]

sorry, i mean pushing 2/3 stops at the film laboratory..