Al Bond wrote:
>
> Frank Paris wrote
>
> > However, I can't say that they are any sharper than the HP, which
> > is either a testimony for the HP or it says something about the
> > effectiveness of my Gitzo carbon fiber tripod and Nikon 28-70mm f2.8D ED
> > IF AF-S lens.
>
> Or that the HP applies some sharpening during scanning. That would mean you aren't
> really comparing like with like. Maybe someone (Art?) who knows more about the HP
> can comment.
>
> Al Bond
>
As I often used to comment about many of these scanners, who knows what
they are doing in software to adjust for hardware defects? Very few of
the mid-priced scanners offer software that provides a "raw" scan.
Third party might, such as VueScan. The older HP PhotoSmart, as well as
I recall, did not offer sharpening as an option, but that doesn't mean
it wasn't doing so at some fixed amount. The newer S-20 has sharpening
as a function within the software, and it defaults to "15" whatever that
means. One can zero it, (I'd love to zero it permanently by default as
I do sharpening last in Photoshop, but I haven't figured out how to do
that.) I think I can build a "filter" to do that, via the software.
Anyway, to "not" answer the original question... I never was able to get
a straight answer as to if the original software applied sharpening or
not, but I suspect it does.
Anyone who is getting similar results with the SS4000 as the original HP
Photosmart either has a version of PhotoSmart I haven't yet seen, or is
having some difficulty with the SS4000 or their vision ;-)
Art
====================================================================
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.
