Experiment v. 1.1 Comments?

[Jeff/fotog]

This is an 8x10 B & W negative converted to digital; I am trying to get some feedback on how it looks from your end.

This isn't a 'Gee Whiz, Knock 'em dead' image, rather an attempt to see how it looks. I had posted some earlier images and the feedback was that the images were too big.

Thank you.

www.jefferyraymond.com

 

[LaFoto]

Well, this one is nice and small and very pleasing to look at. I like the tones... did you add these later in photoshop or are these the tones you got from the scanned negative?

 

[Marctwo]

I personally think an optimal size is:

• width: upto 600px
• Height: upto 400px

So a regular landscape image would be 600 x 400, a regular portrait image would be 267 x 400 and a panoramic image may be something like 600 x 200.

That's the way I like to see/show them, anyway.

 

[Jeff/fotog]

This was a Zone System development process; the whites on the fence and trim were beyond the ability of the film to hold detail; therefore development was reduced about
-1.5...In PS, the negative had a decided blue-ish cast to it (due to the emulsion), so I modified the blue into a slight sepia cast. The print is huge (which has been my problem here) and doesn't work well in a small version in B & W; so part of the experiment is to try to make the image work in a smaller scale.

At 400dpi, this image is about 38Mb, and crashed PS.

There is so much more 'data' on an analogue neg than on a digital neg, it seems you have to be cutting down size and pixels to get a smaller and still 'punchy' image over to someone else's computer screen (assuming not everyone has DSL!)

Long answer to a kind question.

Appreciate your observation!

www.jefferyraymond.com