I have not even look at the curve, I'm not trying to go too deep. But
my point is:
1. Film use the same printing channel does not mean they will have the
same character, a film design with lower contrast does not need
another printing curve to make higher contrast result. E-6 processing
use on most slides and different slides come out differently. IMO
printing channel is mainly use for color correction, just like the
Fuji Reala and Kodak Ektacolor Pro 160 I have tried, they are warmer
than many other film, need special color correction during scanning.
2. I have never use Pro Image 100 but the Gold 100 definitely not
specially good in skin tone reproduction. But the people how have used
Pro Image 100 said it has very good skin tone reproduction.
Okay may be the people report about the Pro Image are idiots, I have
not tried it so I will not comment anymore.
C.H.Ling
"John A. Lind" wrote:
>
> Did you closely compare the the characteristic curves? Try overlaying one
> set of curves over the other (if you can copy the images out of the
> PDF). I plotted not only points at which the curve cross the grid lines,
> but the curve shapes between them also.
>
> The *set* of characteristic curves defines what the resultant image will be
> on film. How it's printed, the machine(s) used, who does it (machine
> operator), and the material it's printed on will make a difference in what
> a *print* resulting from a negative looks like. I know that all too well
> in having color negatives printed by consumer and pro labs. The curves and
> other data for these two films track more closely than *any* other pair of
> consumer and pro films made by Kodak *known* to be the consumer and pro
> versions (e.g. Elitechrome 100 and E100S).
>
> I wouldn't have asserted their "sameness" otherwise. To me it's
> undeniable. It's also entirely credible to _me_ that Kodak's marketdroids
> *would* do exactly this to sell the film to those who *only* buy pro
> films. The difference between them would be the batch controls (with lot
> numbers) and "aging" process conducted with pro films so they are shipped
> at peak, if they're even doing that with this film. It is _definitely_not_
> one of the Portra films!
>
> BTW, I didn't think it was sold in the U.S. but only to certain overseas
> markets.
>
> -- John
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|