NikonM Negafix profiles vrs HDR Negafix profiles

[Gregory C]

I am now basically using SF Ai NikonM to scan my film and save it in HDR format. I then use SF HDR to invert/process the negative and produce the final image archiving the HDR file for future use. I noticed tonight though that there appear to be many more film profiles in SF Ai NikonM than there are in SF HDR.

are there indeed more profiles in Ai NikonM than HDR?

are the Ai NikonM profiles better than the HDR profiles?

for the best quality, should we use Ai NikonM or HDR (with their respective profiles) to produce the final image?


regards
Gregory

[Gregory C]

I just noticed:

SF HDR does not have the Kodak EktaPress profile. the Tri-X profile is pretty good for the "Kodak 5101 Ektar 125-1" film I'm currently scanning but only provides the 400ASA profiles.

SF Ai NikonM has the EktaPress and Tri-X profiles. the Tri-X profiles include a 100ASA profile.

why are there so many differences? if anything, I would expect HDR to include *every* profile available.

do I need to import the updated profiles into HDR? weren't they included in the SF HDR 6.2.0r3 update?

regards
Gregory