Re: slide vs neg

[P3D John Ohrt <johrt@xxxxxxx>]

P3D Eric Goldstein wrote:
> 
> John Ohrt wrote:
> 
> > You were doing great until the last sentence.  :-)
> 
> Jee thanks, I am so relieved... 8-)
> 
> > One of the best ways of displaying an enlarged negative is as a backlit
> > transparency.  So if contrast, resolution, and accuatance are your
> > concern, the best way to achieve a film positive is to enlarge/contact
> > print a film negative to a negative medium.
> 
> Perhaps if I restate the point in different terms...
> 
> Certainly it is true that when displaying a film negative, a film
> positive will be less compressed (and higher res) than a paper
> positive... But how is this more advantageous than shooting a film
> positive (chrome) as the original?
> 
> Eric G.


Because the final negative transparency medium is also finer grained and
higer res  than the any final positive transparency medium.

If you are talking about "slide" format, I doubt that contact printing
two negatives is worth the trouble.  So maybe I agrre with you for
diferent reasons there.

However, when you are taking a backlit transparency of similar size to
typical large paper prints, it definitely is worth the trouble.

Regards,
--
John Ohrt,  Regina, SK, Canada
johrt@xxxxxxx



------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2017
***************************
***************************
 Trouble? Send e-mail to 
 wier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 To unsubscribe select one of the following,
 place it in the BODY of a message and send it to:
 listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   unsubscribe photo-3d
   unsubscribe sell-3d
   unsubscribe mc68hc11
   unsubscribe overland-trails
   unsubscribe icom
 ***************************