Re: "Pepper grain" (was Minolta Multi Pro)

["Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Smith" <rsmith@unb.ca>
To: <scan@leben.com>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: "Pepper grain" (was Minolta Multi Pro)


> At 1:09 AM +0100 4/5/02, Kennedy McEwen wrote:
> >Have you spoken to Kodak or Fuji about it?  From what
Reichmann is
> >indicating, Fuji are taking steps to resolve the problem.
Perhaps
> >Kodak have already done so or, more likely IMO, are not aware
of the
> >problem and not screening for it either, meaning that some
films
> >have it (by chance those you examined) and some don't (like
the
> >Kodak film Riechmann and Rains examined).
>
> No, until you mentioned Reichmann's article I didn't know
> anyone else cared about it. It will indeed be interesting to
see if
> the manufacturers can prevent the formation of the tiny bubbles
in
> the outside emulsion-protecting layer.

After scanning my first 4 sheets of Polaroid 665 film on an Agfa
scanner and strips of them on the Nikon LS 8000  I wondered why
so many photographers love to work with that film. The base can
have a cross stria pattern like ice crystals on its surface. Not
something that you can see in the scan but it must influence the
scan however. Under a microscope it is easy to detect. The film
was treated the right way with sodium sulfite and a water rinse
afterwards. When I mentioned that observation on another list one
of the other members wrote that they see it sometimes on the drum
scans they make. This film is like the Polaroid 55. Ansel Adams
liked to use it if I can believe all what is written about it.
The base of Ilford FP4 is a lot more transparent.

Ernst



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