In article <46d9d192@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Bill Tuthill <ccreekin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>Thanks Michael and Philip! Interesting datapoints.
>Weird that the Nikon scanner makes Pro 160 look grainier than Portra 160.
>In Ctein's article, Pro 160S was slightly less grainy than Portra 160NC.
>Whereas Portra 800 was noticeably less grainy than Pro 800Z, all colors.
I did not compare grain sizes. In many cases 160S is very nice. However,
sometimes, mostly in shadow areas but also in skies, it gets ugly. It
doesn't
mean that the grains are particularly big, but it often a case of more
chroma related noise compared to Kodak's best films.
I was very worried about the direction Kodak seemed to be going so I just
dropped them. Maybe I should get 160NC for images where shooth surfaces
and
shadow areas are important, and keep the 160S for sharpness.
--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
|
