Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was wondering how the difference between the lab scans I received the other day and my own scan would pan out. Many of you would have seen the poppy photo I posted a few days back, and tonight I thought I'd scan the negative and see how differently I'd interpret it. For this reason I didn't refer to the lab scan. I guess a few people don't have access to a scanner and minder wonder how what they could get out of a negative might differ from the interpretation made by the lab. I'm not the world's greatest exponent of scanning or photoshopping, but I think I know which I prefer. Anyway, if it's of any interest to anyone, here is the comparison, starting with my scan:

 

p2653240361-5.jpg

 

Both versions look extremely nice! I would have a hard time choosing between the two.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is stunning, Wonzo - Beautiful!

 

Thank you, Eoin - here`s another one from the same day ...

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

NYC, Adox Color Implosion

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites

very interesting.  The Lab scan is warmer.  What was the film again?

 

 

Very interesting comparison Phil, thank you. It's actually a quite good lab scan, at least based on my experience. Whenever I've tried such scans I always receive oversharpened low resolution rubbish. Nevertheless, your scan clearly has more detail in the highlights and seems crisper overall (though the colour is possibly a bit too cool?). It shows how much can be gained by scanning oneself.

 

br

Philip

 

 

M6, 35mm Summilux, Portra 400

 

attachicon.gifPortra 400.jpg

 

 

Wonzo - this is awesome. What great light and how serendipitous to be there with your camera and your eyes!

 

 

Both versions look extremely nice! I would have a hard time choosing between the two.

 

 

NYC, Adox Color Implosion

 

You've got that implosion exploding Adam! I just love the effect - a lot like the old GAF500 that Deborah Turbeville and Sarah Moon used so effectively in the 1970s.

 

 

 

Thank you for your thoughts Adam, Philip and Edward, which are greatly appreciated. I used just a cheap Kodak 400ISO film (GC 400 it says on the neg). Yes, mine is cooler, and I agree, it is hard to pick a preference in some respects. Having looked at the comparison again, I do like the warmth of the lab scan a bit better than mine. I may redo it sometime - the benefit, of course, of doing your own scans! The coolscan scan (mine) will, of course, be able to be used to print or whatever, whereas the low-resolution lab scan is just a thumbnail sketch. Still, I've learned something from the exercise - and thanks again for your help.

Edited by stray cat
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...