Color Negatives

[Finder]

I guess resolution is just over my head for some reason

There are diffierent ways of thinking about resolution. pixel resolution is just the number of pixels in an image and are independant of the detail that can be seen. Resolving power is the closest two lines can be and still be seen as separate and refer to the ability of on an imaging system to "see" detail. These are two different things.

Imagine you draw a bunch of parallel lines with a gap of 0.1 mm. You scan this at diiferent pixel resolutions from 1 megapixel to 20 megapixels. At about 5 megapixels the lines appear distinct. So if you scan anywhere from 5 megapixels to 20 megapixels, you are increasing the number of pixels, but you are not increasing the number of lines that are visible. Film is like the drawing. At one point you are not going to get any more detail out of the negative no matter how many pixels goes into the scan. Naturally, if the scan is below 5 megapixels, you are losing detail.

Now that was a simple example and I just was pulling number out of the air to give an example. The topic of reproduction is a little more complex than what I presented, but the basic idea is there.

 

[Ronald M]

If you think digital is cheap, I assure you that you are trading the cost of film for many other new and continuing expenses. It does give far better control and instant gratification.

For control, a well scanned neg is just fine also. But you don`t get that for $7

 

[vicmortelmans]

The process is fixed (C-41, E-6); one cannot usefully vary the development time (much) or any other stage.

(except that some people say you can push color film--but does it really work, or do you just make a mess of lousy images?)

May I drop in with an urgent question? Probably not the first time it's asked, but I didn't find the answer straight ahead.

Accidentally, I underexposed a roll of Fuji Superia400 by one stop (ISO dial at 800 :bang: )... should I just drop it in the bag for the lab, or should I try to have it push-processed in some way?

I think some parameters are in favour of having it developed as if exposed for ISO400:
- it's intended for scanning, and less density is usually not a bad thing for scanners
- shots are mostly of low brightness contrast (used flash), so the one stop shift won't push it outside of the range of the film

What do you think?

Groeten,
Vic

 

[navilluspm]

If you have them develop it normal, the negatives will come out grainy. If you have neatimage or a program like it, you can get rid of the grain, but it will cost some detail, but not alot. It depends how large you want to make the prints.

I, personally, would ask them to push if they know how to do it. But I don't think your pictures would be ruined if you didn't.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

If you have them develop it normal, the negatives will come out grainy. If you have neatimage or a program like it, you can get rid of the grain, but it will cost some detail, but not alot. It depends how large you want to make the prints.

I, personally, would ask them to push if they know how to do it. But I don't think your pictures would be ruined if you didn't.

I have never heard of C-41 push processing. E-6 can be pushed and pro labs offer E-6 push processing, but I have always had the impression that C-41 does not allow for pushing, or at least I have never seen it offered anywhere.

With standard processing most color negatives can take one stop underexposure, but the results will be quite grainy, similar to a digital P&S camera used at high ISO settings. Here's an example. I don't know the exact underexposure since it was done with a P&S and the AE did not work properly for this shot, but probably less than one stop. Film was Superia 200: