…Because there is a difference; and it’s a big one.
(Incidentally not the one I thought–but a difference nonetheless)
Technical:
Both scanned the SAME way in Vuescan Professional, using no sharpening or dust correction. Three passes with Multi-Exposure, no enhancement present, 2650 DPI.
Dust spotted, and processed to taste in LR 5.7.1 (WB, crop adjustment, tone)
Exported to JPG, and posted here for your perusal.
EDIT: The upper scan was with the Opticfilm 120; the lower with the flatbed Epson V600. For comparison purposes, here is the same scan with the Opticfilm, using Silverfast as intended
I don’t know if I’m spotting the “big” difference of which you refer, but I do see three differences:
1. Despite the fact that you’ve adjusted WB, the skin tones are more red in Image #1.
2. Image #1 is sharper (looking, among other things, at Baby J’s flowers reveals this to be the case).
3. Image #2 looks to be more “magnified”… not sure if this is secondary to the cropping (during film placement in the holders?) difference evident between the two scans.
Thanks Peter–you are correct on all counts. I think the magnification issue is also a very slight difference in crop, which I could not equalize.
You have likely figured this out, but: First one OF120, second Epson V600.
-M.
Are we the only ones here Mark?
Can you hear the echo… echo… echo… ?