Mathieu18 wrote:
retro, how do you have more options with film? I'm not a film basher, with good scans I could see it being roughly equal, but don't see how it's better. I don't have the time or space to develop my own film easier. Maybe someday but it'll be several years.
Steve, Kolari just released a new filter that's supposed to be great for eliminating hot spots. Still it seems to me the lens is still more important in that regard than the filter?
I don't want to make this thread a film vs. digital thread because this isn't the point - two different media which can complement each other. You are right that by scanning you will lose some of the original tonal range fixed on the negative - but even a darkroom print will change contrast and tonal latitude in the final print (normally grain is less visible). Similar things happen in a scan of the negative - you will lose some of contrast and tonal latitude, and grain will be more visible due to the reflection of the silver grain. This will always remain a catch and compromise of some sort no matter if purely analog or hybrid with scanning. But the difference to a digital monochrome will always be visible IMO - some films might be closer how a digital monochrome looks (for example XP2 400 film) while others will always have a lot more tonality (PanF+ 50 film). And especially highlight effects will look very different on film, too - something I personally like a lot in B&W. For me it is worth the effort working with film .
Apr 05, 2018 at 04:13 PM
Previous versions of retrofocus's message #14425645 « Monochrome e-mount »
.