>Bear in mind that it is not important, how does the mask look to your eye,
>but how the paper emulsion sees it. and for the paper the differences may
>be negligible.
So would one be wrong to interpret what you are saying here in a fashion as
to infer that it might be generally said that these films with their orange
masks, whatever the differences, are optimized for traditional photographic
printing on photographic papers and emulsions using chemical processes where
the mask has little bearing on the outcome except maybe to add some time to
the processing and some contrast to the outcome and may not be optimized for
digital scanning and processing where the mask may come into more play as a
factor in effecting the final printed outcome? Or put another way, the
differences under the traditional chemical methods are intended to be
negligible; but not so under digital methods where the scanner can be
assumed to be like your eye and not like a paper emulsion?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roman Kielich®
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 4:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: orange mask
At 07:37 13/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Improper film storage and handling prior to processing
>plays a big part in the consistency of color and density
>characteristics of the orange mask.
not exactly. what you call the orange mask is in reality the mask plus an
unwanted image. properly stored films precessed in proper manner have
correct mask plus very low fog. if you bugger storage and/or processing
then you increase the fog. remember the mask is there to compensate for
not-so-ideal spectral properties of the formed dyes. if we treat the fog
and the image as "positive" density, the mask will be "negative". you deal
with two images dependent of themselves and superimposed.
>Also when referring to the word "lot" are you speaking of
>same film type but different batch or are you referring to
>Kodak versus Fuji?
>Different film types (Kodak, Fuji) will definitely show visual
>differences in the orange mask.
>Also different ISO ratings have differences as well.
the color of the mask depends on used components, which vary from
manufacturer to manufacturer and/or film. it is however possible to have
films with identical mask, even from different manufacturers. it depends,
what they put into a kettle.
Bear in mind that it is not important, how does the mask look to your eye,
but how the paper emulsion sees it. and for the paper the differences may
be negligible.
>Paul
>
>> >Problem is that the color characteristics
>> >of the orange mask vary -- from one film
>> >lot to another, and in particular, as a
>> >function of the processing of the film.
>>
>>
>>[rafe b:]
>>I can't say for certain, but my gut (and
>>my eyes) disagree with you. Plus, I have
>>heard this from others.
>>
>>I'd be curious to hear other folks'
>>experiences and thoughts on this.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<
> http://okphoto.webjump.com
>P:250-498-2800 F:250-498-6876
> >>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<
"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow
in Australia".
