1) Of course, I checked the slides first, and I base my opinions on the
direct observation of the slides. But I can say that the differences you can
see in the web images are corresponding very very closely to those observed
in the original slides, and they are conducive to the same conclusions.
2) As for the scans: I just handed the slides to the graphic of
"Fotografia Reflex", the Italian magazine that published the article in May
2002. He had the slides scanned by their usual typography via a drum scanner
and, of course, without any kind of correction. This to me was a way to
insure a "standard" scan, and I preferred it to a scan via Kodak PhotoCD
(like my other images in my site) or via the usual Nikon Coolscan by the
shop ner home. I just checked that the resulting images once displayed on
screen showed the same colour balance seen in slides.
As stated in the text of the article, the test is not a scientific one, but
the results are just those that one can expect to find in everydays
practice.
Actually there is a shortcoming, and it is in the fact that E6 films were
ALL developed in Kodak E6 baths, while Fuji films require proprietary Fuji
baths and are only "compatible" with E6 baths. But, nevertheless, I did not
bother, as in practice labs using Fuji baths are very rare (I know of maybe
ONE here in Rome) and (nearly) everybody has his Fuji films developed in
Kodak baths, therefore the test results are in line with everyday's
practice, which was my objective.
