Got my negatives back today - that old folding Kinax camera still works !!!

[Dazz1]

Interesting thought, to change the negative version first. I inverted it back to positive as a first step, my reasoning being that the inverting process should be a simple mathematical process, not prone to degrading the information. I could be very wrong there though. You also mention colour noise and a magenta cast. I didn't think to do a white balance, and going further back, I could have also set the camera to black and white, but didn't. Don't know if that would make it better or worse.

Keeping notes would be a good idea, as it is easy to get lost. Also, if you come back to it later, after years for example, it will be almost essential.

Whatever else happens, I got to try some film in a very old camera, and the project has turned out to be a success inmy estimation. Thanks for being interested and helping.

[arthurking83]

The only reason I suggested trying to maximise the amount of processing on the negative version, is that processing a jpg can be a 'destructive' process. Dunno too much about it tho, as I hardly ever do it personally.

B&W on the camera may be a good idea too tho .. actually makes sense. No need to be accurate with Wb setting I guess(as it's black and white).

I suppose your the person with the finger on the red button, so you will see more closely the ability of every edit step you produce.

With raw file editing, the order of your process steps can make a difference to the final image.

With my slide copying, I used raw, and I found that doing as much on the negative(in terms of exposure contrast and suchlike) made a slight difference to the overall final image, than if I added my subsequent tweaks after I inverted the neg. I could never get exactly the same look on the two different version of editing, although both could come out looking quite OK, if I captured the negative well to begin with.