Jaffa: you ramble rather interestingly. 🙂
About Velvia: I once did some scanning work for a pro shooter who covered the British Open, and shot nothing but 35mm Velvia 50. Those images blew my socks off – perfect, gorgeous, almost scary in their MF-level detail. But he sweated the details, even though he had gorgeous weather (yes, I'm talking the UK here), but naturally you have to be more on-your-toes in good weather than bad when shooting 'chrome.
Photoshop and film: it depends on the film, of course, and climbing the PS learning curve, but for films like Portra (and Fuji Pro and Kodak's E200), the scanning process is almost drop-dead simple, which makes PS work all the easier; I tend to make only minor tweaks in terms of contrast and, occasionally, color. Again, I feel more can be done with a low-to-moderate-contrast film under most conditions, because I can always increase contrast where and when needed/wanted, whereas trying to tame a neg or 'chrome with too much contrast is a lot more trouble.
Sharpness: you're right – sometimes it can be fetishized to ridiculous ends. I've never had issues with sharpness for the rare times I shoot digital. It's the assorted other issues with digital capture that drive me up the wall (and for which I'm not willing to dedicate $5000+ for a single camera body that might address a few of them). With good gear (camera, lens, scanner, printer) and decent film, I don't fret about sharpness. I fret about getting most of what's in my minds eye onto that little chip of film.
And, looking at your work again, you'll have no problems whatsoever in that realm. Whatever you do, I (and, no doubt, others here) will be anxious to see the results!
- Barrett
