----- Original Message ----- From: "Toralf Lund" Subject: Re: Coming Soon - A new K-mount Film Camera
> Paul Stenquist wrote: >> Point 3 isn't valid either. If lab processing is the way you want to >> go, you can drop off a memory card at any halfway decent lab and pick >> up your prints in a couple of hours. The minilab that used to process >> my color neg film claims they can produce even nicer prints from best >> quality jpegs. > > This was actually discussed here a few days ago: Isn't it a bit of a > problem that most labs still only accept jpegs? I mean, how much can > they do to get good prints from a file with only 24 bits (and lossy > compression, too...) if the colours are incorrect to begin with? > Surely film gives the lab a lot more to work with? Or camera raw files, > for that matter.... A best quality jpeg is fine for making prints, providing it is, in fact, a good file. There is not as much latitude to fix exposure and colour failure as there is with colour negative film, but I don't consider a poorly exposed or white balanced file to be "best quality". Negative film gives the lab about a stop of underexposure and about 3 stops of over exposure before a good print can't be pulled from it, a jpeg has about half that latitude. Film can be very difficult to get good colour from if the light was the wrong colour without going to custom printing and masking against cross curves, which means $$$$. Photographers have gotten really lazy about exposure over the past couple of decades. Camera meters have gotten somewhat more accurate, and film has gotten much more forgiving in this time period. The ones who have become dependant on the built in latitude of the photographic process to save them are now finding that they are paying for their sloppiness with poor quality pictures. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
