I looked at your scans. They look very impressive. Good subjects for showing
off sharpness. One thing I did notice even from my blurry scans is how silky
smooth they look compared to the HP. I'm looking forward to getting my
SS4000 working fully up to specs!
I notice you are putting copyrights on your pictures. Do you know about
digital watermarking? Paint Shop Pro 7.0 has this, so I'm sure PhotoShop
also has it. It distributes an invisible watermark throughout your image
that copyright violators can't get rid of without so distorting the image as
to make it commercially worthless. You use Digimark's decoder to find the
watermark if you find your picture being used illegally anywhere and then
you can go after them. You can encode copyright information and other
messages in it that have absolutely no effect on the quality of your image
and are totally invisible. We tried all kinds of things to fool the Digimark
software: expand, contract, increase and decrease contrast and brightness,
cutting out a piece, and the only thing that caused the software to fail to
find the water mark was stretching the image so much as to make it
worthless. Very impressive technology.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julie, female Galah (3 years)
Little Birdie, male Splendid Parakeet (13 years)
Snowflake, male cockatiel (12 years)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Steve Jones
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 11:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: got my SS4000
>
>
> Frank Paris wrote:
>
>
> > My scanned negatives from the Polaroid are
> > ludicrously poor in sharpness.
>
> > Anyone have negative experience scanning negatives with the SS4000?
>
> I too have recently taken delivery of the Polaroid and am extremely happy
> with the way it handles negs. The following links should give you some of
> my first efforts:
>
> http://www.class47.org.uk/gallery/photos/sj031511.jpg
> http://www.class47.org.uk/gallery/photos/sj031512.jpg
> http://www.class47.org.uk/gallery/photos/sj031513.jpg
> http://www.class47.org.uk/gallery/photos/sj031514.jpg
>
> I make no claims as to the photographic merit of the snaps <g> but I think
> they serve to illustrate that you should be able to get reasonable results
> first time around. As you say, something must be wrong...
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve Jones,
> Shropshire, England
>
> Railway site at http://www.samsonrail.com/
> The Boneyard at http://www.class58.com/
> UK Railways in the 70s at http://www.ukrail1970s.co.uk/
> UK Railway Photography Webring at http://www.wailwayweb.co.uk/
> Personal site at http://www.sammythecat.com/
>
>
> ====================================================================
> The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
> To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE
> FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if
> you are reading the Digest.
====================================================================
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
