Grain aliasing: do some neg films suffer less than others?

["Alan Rew" <arew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear fellow list members,

Having acquired my new Nikon Coolscan IV ED (i.e. LS40), which I use for
scanning negs, I am now seeing grain aliasing artifacts more clearly
than with my old Canoscan FS 2710.

I've tried using the Nikon Scan GEM software, but to my eyes this
produces either (a) an unnaturally smooth appearance or (b) strange
artifacts that look like small wiggly lines. With GEM set to maximum (4)
the image looks too soft with loss of detail; with Gem set to 1 there
are still visible grain artifacts. Settings in between are no better.
This is a particular problem for me as most of my shots are landscapes
with significant amounts of sky in them.

So... I was wondering if switching film brands would make a beneficial
difference.

Previously I've used Fujicolor Superia, ASA 100 or 200. Talking to a
camera shop assistant about this it was suggested to me that the newer
Fujicolor Reala might be better (or at least different) as it has
hexagonal grains rather than T grains (whatever that means). Is this a
plausible idea, or just BS?

Has anyone tried scanning different neg film types and found a
particular film that produces less grain artifacts than others?

Alternatively, is this purely dependent on the resolution of the
particular film scanner used? My Nikon scans at 2900 dpi, the Canon at
2720 dpi (I think).

Sorry for the large number of questions, but I'm feeling rather
frustrated that having forked out GBP 550 for a new scanner I'm no
nearer solving the grain problem than before!

Thanks in anticipation for any help,

Alan Rew


-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.