# Inconsistent with Negative Conversion and Roll Analysis On

**URL:** <https://forums.negativelabpro.com/t/inconsistent-with-negative-conversion-and-roll-analysis-on/9738>\
**Category:** Image Editing Help\
**Created:** [September 26, 2025, 3:59pm UTC](https://forums.negativelabpro.com/t/inconsistent-with-negative-conversion-and-roll-analysis-on/9738 "2025-09-26T15:59:53Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Harry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f6c823/32.png) [@Harry](https://forums.negativelabpro.com/u/Harry)\
**Post date:** [September 27, 2025, 6:44am UTC](https://forums.negativelabpro.com/t/inconsistent-with-negative-conversion-and-roll-analysis-on/9738/3 "2025-09-27T06:44:25Z")

</div>

> [@Digitizer](#):
>
> NLP converts images based on their tonalities and colours. The more variety we get in both aspects, the easier and consistent the conversions will be, normally.

I can understand that of course but isn’t Roll Analysis there so that you can choose the conversion that works best for you and then apply it to similar frames, and by that I mean similar in terms of subject matter and lighting on the day you made the exposures on to film? These frames seem to be just that and if the original exposures varied by half a stop or so I can’t see why that would matter, in the darkroom it wouldn’t make a jot of difference to the filtration needed to print them so that they all looked the same.

If Roll Analysis doesn’t do that and still insists on processing the frames differently is there a better way? I’ve read that you save a setup and apply that, or alternatively people seem to miss the ability to ‘Sync’. Is there another way that the OP can get the results they are expecting, and that I would like to see?

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.negativelabpro.com/t/inconsistent-with-negative-conversion-and-roll-analysis-on/9738)._