Hallo,
the last months some friends/photographers came up with the advise to check some us labs like "richard lab" or "indie lab"
I saw some of their scan-results and their are to some point really impressive.
So i started some reasearch on the web: they are working most of the time with frontiers/noritsu - scanners.
In our university ( i study photography) we have next to lab some scanners (flextights and nikon 9000) but i can tell, that i never saw that "well" (not accurate!) colorcorrected examples in other students work, as i saw in from these labs). Aswell i have not seen that good scans from color-labs here in Germany! To some point it is somehow more like just a colorbalance, but i do not why...
anyway: the conclussion seems to be, that the magic happens in the scanning - process.
1. Sure, it is the skill of the operator and a well-prepared profile/ color-workflow.
2. here comes the question/point: I've heard, that the lab-scanners render/digitalize colors in another way, than "prosumer"-scanners do.
When you use different scanners with the same adjustments you get different interpretation of colors, but after matching them there is still a difference.
is it possible to archive - with some experience and lots of literature

- exact (or almost ) the same colors/tonality with f.e. an imacon or coolscan as with an frontier or a noritsu?
Again: this is not about the technical qualitity of the final scan.
(at that point i will send them some rolls next week to see the prints results)
Best regards,
Grinschus