When I first started working with image editing programs to do what I call Painting with Photographs, I used a flatbed desktop scanner to transfer a photograph to my computer. While the results were good, I did not like working in this manner for a few reasons.

Firstly, while negative developing is a consistent process, the development of prints is not. As a computer can be manipulated so as to change the color balance of an image, so can the enlarger that processes the prints. If the enlarger is automatic, it reads the film and chooses the proper printing intensity. But, without getting technical, the results can differ from machine to machine as well as from negative to negative depending on the placement and proportion of light and dark objects. If the prints are processed by an enlarger that has an operator that actually controls the color balance, brightness level, and contrast, each operator sees the image differently. Thus one relies on another party to process the print that will be enlarged.

Secondly, the print that will be scanned in is a second generation image and, thus, has lost some sharpness and resolution as well as details in shadow and highlight area. This is especially true, if the photograph was taken on a day that was very bright and there was a lot of contrast in the scene. The latitude of film is much greater.

On my husband s and my last trip, we photographed many waterfalls on a brilliantly sunny day. The range of contrast was so huge that I had no idea how the image would look. I took many pictures of the same scene using different exposure settings. When I had the negatives developed, they did not vary much at all; however, the negatives varied a lot. This lack of printing variation was not due to poor printing, but had to do with the possible tonal range of the paper.

While not even examining the mechanical merits of the scanners themselves, it can be seen that image quality is lost from the negative to the print. Obviously, I am not referring to custom printing where tonal values are determines, parts of the image can be lightened or darkened, etc. In this article, I am addressing the differences between using a negative and its print that has been well printed as part of a roll of film.

The film scanner works much like a flatbed scanner. Unfortunately, it is still more expensive than the average flatbed scanner although the price is coming down all the time. Also, it can only be used for negative or positive black and white or color film and slides. I have not seen nor heard about any film adapters for moderate priced flatbed scanners that work well. Moderate price (in this instance) means under $1,500.00.

I have found that when I scan in a negative with my film scanner, I never have to sharpen the image. The shadow and highlight detail are there even if I have to manipulate the contrast and brightness of the image. Also, even though the film scanner decides on the color balance, at least one is working with a first generation and not a second image.

Thus, a film scanner allows for better highlight and shadow detail, sharper images, and a possibly more accurate portrayal of the color balance of the original image.

After finishing this article, I saw a brand new magazine called PC Photo. It discusses different aspects of photography and the PC. The premier issue (June 1997) is available in Tulsa. I saw a copy at Borders on 21 street near Lewis. It seems to be geared toward the novice to intermediate PC user. I believe this magazine would be very helpful to people wanting to start playing with image editing.

For more information on the Tulsa Computer Society click here