Hi, regarding, "if the differences can be easily eliminated in post..." They can't, easily. Let me be more blunt about this. If I were to photograph perhaps a half dozen people of different complexions, and wearing various colors, and then earlz stand-developed the film and either scanned the film or sent it to you for scanning, then it would most likely be beyond your capabilities to "adequately" (whatever that means) color correct the images. In fact, if you had to get the clothing color close to "correct" to "save your life" or some other dire-sounding consequence, your best chance might be to seek out all of the individuals and ask to see all of the clothing in question. Or perhaps rephotograph them. Regarding, "or [the differences] are so small that they can't be noticed unless compared side by side on optical prints...does it matter?" In my view, the differences will not be small. I mainly use the example of optical prints so that I don't have to specify a bunch of requirements for the scanning setup and final viewing on a monitor. In my experience, for someone to really appreciate how good they, or their systems, are, I think they need to see side-by-side comparisons with some sort of industry standard, or other benchmark. If their system or skills are not too good, then this is likely the eye-opener that immediately stops all of the arguments. Their response might be along the order of, "Oh, now I see what you mean." My guess is that is how this thread would end if the OP took their film to a well-qualified pro lab for a comparison. But maybe not, who can say for sure?