any cleaning setting on Vuescan (any version)
makes the output slightly softer. The results may be different on other
scanners.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
> le 27/04/01 0:24, Rob Geraghty à [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> > Didier wrote:
> >> I spent a couple of hours and failed in batchscanning
> >> disk rawfiles (Vs7.0/Mac/324MbRAM)
> >
> > What scanner and what versio of Vuescan, Didier?
> I'm scann
"Alessandro Pardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the scene I chose for my test was a *bit* contrasty, still the slide was
> well exposed, and details in the shadows were perfectly visible even by
> holding up the slide against a window.
I expect that *all* the Nikon scanners will fall down in shad
"Mikael Risedal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After some experiment with the scratched film I found out that the best
way
> to have optimal resolution from the scanner are to move the focus area
half
> way out from the middle of the picture to the side.
> This means that the depth of field now co
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a message dated 4/27/2001 7:43:30 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I found by accident that there is a huge difference between 48-bit 2700
ppi scans on
> > my LS-30 (where that should have been more than enough) and 64-bit,
2700
> > ppi settings.
As in 64bit
JF Mahony wrote:
> i am very interested in negatives vs slides in contrasty situations. i
shoot
> a lot of tennis in the middle of the day with provia 100, E200 or fugi
multy
> speed. i have an LS-1000 and do have trouble losing the extreme
highlights.
> i like the color of slide film better than
"Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll have to get a Dual II 2820 DPI.
"Vladislav Jurco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My experience with Supra 400 is very good. Very little grain-alliasing no
> matter in which channel (skin, sky, greens) - especially absence in blue
> channel sur
"Tom Scales" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to be able to load a roll of film, go to bed, and wake up to 36
> properly exposed, properly focused scans. Why else have the roll film
> adapter?
Possibly Ed could modify vuescan to focus on a specific offset in the frame.
Rob
"Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since dust is always "white" on negs and always "black" on slides, while
> "noise" is usually lighter and "grain" is usually darker than the
> surrounding field of pixels, is this or can it be considered in the
cleaning
> algorithms?
If you could characte
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It focuses in the center of the scan region. I'll look into this some
more
> when I get a loaner LS-4000 from Nikon, hopefully in the next week or so.
Thanks Ed! I was thinking of all the Nikon scanners, which supposedly
have a capability to focus on a specific poin
Didier wrote:
> That's it. I try batchscanning rawfiles to make crops (and to save time)
Hm. I'll have to try batch cropping from raw files. I wouldn't have
thought of it!
Rob
her frame on the film
and partially overlapped the last frame). I ended up having to turn the
strip around and scan the frame as frame 1 rather than frame 5. No big
deal but it would be nice if Vuescan reported somewhere how many frames
were detected by the scanner.
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
squeezed another image onto the end of the
strip. Hopefully I'll be able to remove the fingerprint with some careful
use of the cloning tool.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
>
>Steve Bye
>
>> Maris
>> Don¹t worry about dpi nor TV size, the image size is 720pixels x 480pixels
>> regardless of whether you have a 16" or 32" TV. Best save the file as
>an
>RGB
>> flat PS file, Mac PICT or TIFF.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Richard
>
>
>
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
Ed wrote:
> I'm thinking of adding a focus offset option, in millimeters, for the
offset
> from the center of the image. I could alternatively add a focus
> position (%) option, which would put the focus position some percentage
> of the way into a frame (50% would be normal, 30% would move the
>
ing grain if the colour balance in the image isn't "normal" daylight.
I think this is one film I'll have to make raw scans from so I can experiment
later with the best method of cropping. Otherwise I'm going to spend forever
rescanning it!
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
use it would require
a refocus *after* the preview.
Are scanners other than the Nikons able to set the position of the focus?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
Maris wrote:
> Slide film is generally less grainy than print film
> in scanning sky. Have you found any good print film for sky?
Someone mentioned Supra 400. I wish someone would produce
a 100 ASA print film optimised for scanning!
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
pra 100 is apparently a previous emulsion rebadged?
As far as apparent grain in sky is concerned, I haven't found Supra 100
to have any advantage over Fuji Superia 100 and the Fuji film is LOTS cheaper.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
Edwni wrote:
>How cheap is the Fuji? I usually buy 36 exposure Supra 100ASA for about
>$2.89 USD. And, once again, it may not be optimized for scanning, but Supra
>100ASA scans very well.
I can get Fuji Superia 24 (not 36) for about US$1.50.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTEC
ipped out look. Will the change in 7.0.16 affect the Canon as well
Ed?
And the LS30? I have also been posting about excessively saturated (and
definitely clipped) reds on the LS30.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
ing
"we'll contact Japan about it". Nikonscan 3.0 doesn't resolve the issue.
Thanks goodness for Vuescan or I'd be so annoyed I'd probably never buy
another Nikon product.
Regards,
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Brian Bisset" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And get yourself a proper Kodak target (Q-60 series or similar), and make
it
> the first frame every time, *especially* if you're shooting interiors
under
> mixed lighting conditions. Your scanner operator/printer will thank-you
for
> it (so will the cl
hat the sales and
support people in other countries and Nikon's own management
have insulated the engineers from being able to resolve the
issue. Fixing it would result in a whole bunch of happier
users who would be more likely to buy future products.
As it is, I'll probably look to Pola
* they could do physically to fix the problem.
What is required is a software fix to a hardware design
fault. Ed's done it, Nikon should be able to.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
ch as the Epson Photo range which
can scan larger film formats.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Mark T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So if you know anyone who looks after IT equipment, ask 'em.. Your
average
> business scanner user couldn't give a toss about how his/her scanner is
> calibrated. :)
Hm. All our scanners at work are HP. No targets. I could ask another guy
who does tech s
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would anyone object if I removed the Long exposure pass
> option from VueScan?
No objection from me, although it was an interesting idea.
Requires less patience than 8x multipass. :)
Rob
"Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In defense of the Japanese, I'd like to add the story about Corona and
> Pinto: both cars had a bad tendency to explode and burn in a rear-end
> collission.
Was it "Cannonball Run" that featured a car just giving a Pinto the
slightest
touch and it explode
DeVries wrote:
> I'm in the market for a film scanner between US $500 and $1K.
Doesn't the Polaroid SS4000 fit intot he top end of that range?
Rob
Robert Smith wrote:
> I an a newbie on this list and I need to know peoples
> opinions on which is the best software for me to use
> to scan negs with my sprintscan 35 plus
You could give Vuescan a try for starters. Go to
http://www.hamrick.com
Registration is only US$40.
Rob
Someone recently gave PSP a plug on the list, and I was trying to remember
the neatest features which PSP 7 has over Photoshop. Two which are
extremely useful are:
1) The ability to rotate an image a fraction of a degree
2) The redeye tool. It allows you to replace the red eye reflection with
Laurie wrote:
>Image=>rotate_canvas=>arbitrary" indicates the exact rotation
>necessary to make the horizon horizontal ... to a hundredth of a
>degree!
In which version? Is it true for PS4, PS5, LE? I don't
know. I am assuming that you are using PS6.
Rob
Rob
Sorry, that was Michael's message I was referring to.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
PSP.
I found that PSP would also crash if you use the salt and pepper filter
on a large image, and some of the other photo editing tools.
If you're using a demo of PSP, it's not worth the hassle, but if you have
the full license it is definitely a good idea, especially if you're workin
ly
recommend a title by Bruce Fraser.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Harry Lehto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When I scan an image containing black sky and bright stellar images with a
> Nikon Coolscan IVED (=LS40) , then close to the edge of the field every
> bright (saturated) stellar image has a faint ghost image separated from
> the main image (by 20- 40 pixe
"John Matturri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm curious how you, or others, store their cds.
I have some folders with CD slip-sheets which I'm storing them in.
Keeps them in a much more compact state than normal jewel cases.
Rob
"Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm happy to report that I've scanned and recorded to CD *all* my
> significant negs and slides from 1949 to 1998--which were the ones I was
> going for, archive-wise.
Wow! I wish I had the time to scan a fraction of mine. Congrats!
Keep in touch, Lynn
"Harry Lehto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The original slide are good with no apparent ghosts. They were actually
> taken with 50mm and 300mm camera lenses. Checked with a good slide
> projector and separately with a microscope that the originals are OK.
OK, it sounds like some sort of aberratio
"Edwin Eleazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Version 3.1 of NikonScan will be out in the next week
Hmm... I wonder if this might include some attempt at fixing the jaggies
problem?
Rob
Ed wrote:
>the focus distance until the contrast is maximized. The only real
>option is the position of the scan line.
But don't the Nikon scanners allow the user to choose an XY point on the
frame as the focussing point?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
would have to be done by Tony Sleep, since it has been sent
to the list and replicated from there.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
ning?
What version of Vuescan are you using?
Try renaming the existing vuescan.ini and allowing the
program to create a new default one. Then try a
troublesome strip of film and see if it makes a
difference. Also, try using a different colour space
like Adobe RGB not sRGB.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
Am I the only one who has problems with the crop outline in Vuescan? I have
been wondering why it is so incredibly difficult to position correctly. I
*think* it's mostly due to one aspect of behaviour. Let's say I'm cropping
an image in Paintshop Pro. I click and drag to create a rough outline
Hi Ed!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Try zooming into the image before dragging the crop outline.
This helps a bit, but the crop box still has a tendency to jump
around when releasing the mouse button after dragging.
I don't want to *have* to use the zoom, as each step slows things
down.
The ten
"Joel Wilcox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yup, works for me. My Crop|Buffer setting is 2% (I think the default) and
> that seems to work well for my full frame crops. A person could probably
> increase this to 10% to make sure the black can't influence the auto
values.
The default 2% often does
I was just going through the files on the computer to see what I could
easily archive to CDR and noticed a huge difference in file sizes. I have
some full frame scans from Fuji 800 print film that occupy 30MB as 8bit LZW
TIFF files, yet I am going through Provia 100F scans at the moment which
sta
ightforward as the click and drag behaviour
in PSP. I'm not saying that to encourage a religious war about software.
Thanks for letting me know how it's done in PS - I'll have to try it out.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
well.
I was just pointing out an advantage of a fine grained film like Provia
which I hadn't realised before; that the higher resolution actually results
in smaller file sizes. This is perhaps counter-intuitive.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
0x200 pixels in 16 bit colour with another of 1024x768 in 8 bit colour.
The first image can have a lot more tonal information, but the second has
more clarity.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
graphs that I took quite legitimately.
The really sad part is that they never spoke to me about the photos before
they went to the lawyer. If they had, I would have sold them the films
just to be rid of it all for less than the lawyer would have charged.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
ously doubt you will get "decent" results out of anything that cheap.
There are flatbeds out there where you can put a large number of slides
in a tray and batch scan them, but I don't know how good the results would
be compared to a Nikon filmscanner.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
the film
ended up with circular marks from the chemistry beading in the sprocket
holes them drying away from them. The lab said that Kodak film did this,
but Fuji film didn't.
I'm sticking to Provia 100F. :)
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
John wrote:
>Will it only overwrite a folder on the "C" drive if it is named C:\Vuescan?
>Will it ignore any renamed folder ?
Vuescan always installs into c:\vuescan. It has no effect on other copies.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
t I don't have an APS camera. :) The LS40 would
presumably do it as well, with slightly better results. I don't know if
the Canon, Minolta or Acer scanners have APS adapters.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
graphic print.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
w) can be used flat or vertically.
There are feet fitted in two sides of the case. I'm using mine flat so
the film goes in vertically. This may also help to keep dust off the CCD.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
es on the film, but I'm not certain
of it, so I don't take the risk. But having taken photos the way you did,
I can see why you would want to scan the entirety of the image out to the
border.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Walter Bushell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it necessary to rescan with infrared every time, IOW, when doing
> multiple scans of the same film is it necessary to do an IR scan every
> time?
If you want to have the cleaning features in Vuescan work, you need
the IR channel. Bu there's no nee
"Walter Nowotny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> scanning unit. The turn round is made by some plastics parts which
probably
> cause the scratches when the negatives are bent too much. I was satisfied
> with that explanation and tried to smooth down the negatives before
> scanning. However, processin
"James Grove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I dont think that will work, as many SCSI devices have to be seen by the
> SCSI BIOS on boot up.
It works with my LS30 and the Scanjet IIIc. Scanners shouldn't be a
problem. The most likely devices that would need to be seen at SCSI BIOS
load would be
he mechanism for the new adaptor.
My LS30 does the same thing.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
he same but the BIOS is different.
Anyway, there's no relationship I'm aware of with Acer.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
uld be identical with Kodachrome
and B&W film because the behaviour with IR is the same.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Nick Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> my order for the Epson 1280.
Does anyone know whether the 1280 in north america is the same as the 1290
elsewhere?
Rob
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My experience is that scanners with better focus show more dust
> than scanners without good focus. For instance, take a SprintScan 4000
> and a Nikon LS-4000 and compare the raw scans. They show exactly
> the same dust spots if you use the same slide on both, and bo
"Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The 780, 880 and 980 which are 2880 dpi 4 color (780 is new to me, so
> I'm jumping to conclusions here)
In Oz there's also a 480 and 680.
> (in which case, I made an error in an earlier posting as I indicated
> the 1280 as an upgrade to the 1270.
I just tried scanning a slide and outputting a colour TIFF and an IR one.
It was very educational. Any sort of mark, scratch or dust spot is utterly
black in the IR scan. Some of the image is also visible as is some of the
grain, which probably explains why the image is softened by ICE.
I haven
"Tom Christiansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the advantage of 2880dpi lengthwise compared to 1440dpi?
>From what I've seen it means less visible dithering and the result is closer
to a photographic continuous tone.
> Some people claim that you shouldn't send pictures to the printer us
"AR Studio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just discovered with Nikon IV that ICE (normal setting, at least) will act
> as ROC (color restoration) if you have an image that has a dominating
color,
> let's say a green forest or a field of yellow flowers.
I've had a lot of trouble in the past with Ni
As a followup, here's a basic comparison between several kinds of films and
their behaviour with the infrared (IR) channel. The thumbnails are tiny I
know, but they are big enough to show the important differences. In IR, the
K64 slide shows quite a bit of image detail, especially on high contra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just tried scanning a slide and outputting a colour TIFF and an
>> IR one. It was very educational. Any sort of mark, scratch or
>> dust spot is utterly black in the IR scan.
> If you look closer, you'll see that the dust spots aren't pure black,
> but instead ar
Re: filmscanners: Colour fix problemRichard N. Moyer wrote:
> He uses PSP, which I have no knowledge about, so some adjustments
> may not be easily accomplished, such as Selective Color, which was
> used to take the yellow out of the white floor.
The colour correction tool in PSP 7 works very wel
I have no idea why, but Vuescan's crop box has gone loopy on me. I'm using
7.0.21. I've been attempting to scan some frames of 35mm colour neg film
using the motorised film strip adapter in my Nikon LS30. I've been using
the zoom function in Vuescan to adjust the edges to include the maximum
am
> on 6/12/01 5:41 AM, Dan Honemann at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > How about the new Iomega Peerless portables (10 and 20GB, USB and
Firewire)?
> > Anyone tried these yet?
My only comment here is future proofing. It's more likely you'll have a
drive
which can read a CDR in 5 years time than an I
true" answer to which
is better. The answer will depend a lot on what your personal tastes are,
and what kind of photos you're taking. If this wasn't true, there would
be a lot less types of film on the market.
I'd still like to post some more film comparisons on my web s
um price for the Kodak film.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
ested setting up hard
drives in hot swap configuration which is probably
an excellent idea. I prefer to have my data on a
write-once medium though. Kind of like making tape
backups.
But what's right for you is quite likely to what is
right for me.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Raphael Bustin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First off, Supra is a C41 print film. Superia,
> as I recall, as an E6 positive film. Fuji's
> "equivalent" to Supra might be Reala, perhaps.
No. Superia is a C41 print film. At least in Australia, all the Fuji
retail (non pro) colour print films
did the scanner manufacturers choose 2700dpi if it's so
prone to aliasing? Or are they clueless and simply picked
it as a reasonable resolution to get an A4 print at 300dpi?
This could get expensive...
Rob
PS Any idea what is happening to your subject lines, Tony?
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
x27;m not sure how the slide
of the AUD has affected the local cost though.
Anyway, I'll make the time soon to try a variety of films on the SS4000
at work and see how the results compare with the LS30. I'm particularly
interested to see what happens to the grain.
Rob
Rob Geraght
"Tony Sleep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IME film type preferences under discussion here are 90% interactions
> between scanner and film, and the nice thing about 4000ppi is that an
> awful lot of the problems seen at ~2700ppi suddenly cease to exist.
Which is useful to know but I for one can'
"rafeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In terms of US $$, you have the same access to eBay
> prices as everyone else, right?
The cost of shipping makes ebay pricing irrelevent.
I saw some unbelievable prices for Epson printers for
example, but by the time you ship it, pay GST on import,
and get a
d try them on various scanners. IMO
that's the only way you'll know whether you can get enough data out of the
film to reproduce the images you want. There may be people on the list
who could help out with providing access to a scanner or scanning a frame
or two for you.
Rob
Rob Geraghty
Marvin wrote:
>At 04:43 AM 6/14/01, Rob Geraghty wrote in another thread (films for scanning):
>>Silver based B&W films do not scan at all well with the LS30
> Often, I believe we are too concerned with overkill in specs.
> Rob's remark triggered a question in my m
een resolutions, but the grain is very
obvious. Clearly they are underexposed compared to
photos exposed in normal daylight.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Has anyone had any problems with NikonScan 3.1 in Windows 2000?
Sounds like Nikonscan 3.1 is worse than 3.0 at least on W2K. Does anyone
know whether 3.1 attempts to fix the jaggies problem, or is it still reading
data
in 64K
"rafeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No problems over here with NikonScan 3.1.
Well, at least it works on the 8000. Has anyone tried it on the LS30 or
LS2000?
Are there jaggies?
Rob
John & Anne Mahany wrote:
> I am having trouble with all versions of Vuescan since
> V7-0-27 and including V7-1 Opening, or rather, trying
> to open the program gives a series of "Illegal Operation"
> boxes in Vuescan.exe.
What scanner and OS are you using?
Rob
"Tony Sleep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > of Fuji 800 taken in full daylight
> Best to rate at 640 IME, it helps keep grain under control, and cleans up
> the shadows appreciably.
I'll bear that in mind if I shoot a roll in the SLR. Unfortunately with
disposible
cameras I have no control over
"John & Anne Mahany" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Win 98SE and SS4k. However, I don't think the scanner is relevant
because
> the "Illegal operations" box comes up instantly I click on "open".
I presume you have the scanner switched on before you boot the PC. Vuescan
should still start even wi
osed at
EI650 but in the low light conditions where I've tried it, the results are
poor when scanned. It's cool to be able to take photos at all with some
of the situations that Fuji 800 makes possible, but I generally find the
grain objectionable.
I just need to save up for that dedicate
ake a few photos with a tripod, I don't think I'll
know for sure.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
t
grain film you can afford. At the end of the day, the quality of the source
material will determine a lot about the quality of the scanned result.
Choosing a scanner has a lot to do with what the buyer wants to do with
the results. There's no single answer that is right for everyone.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
g did the
leafscan take to produce the scan compare to the Nikon? How long from holding
the piece of film to having the TIFF file on the computer?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
I've just tried Nikonscan 3.1 on my LS30 with a slide and a frame of Fuji
Superia 100. Please bear in mind that's just two frames of film, so it's
hardly exhaustive. I scanned the same frames using Vuescan 7.1 to produce
48bit colour and 16bit IR files of the same frames. Here's what I found...
"John Bradbury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a raw scan file but its 74 meg at 2700 resolution!
> I can reduce the res to give a smaller file. Is that OK?
You'd need to crop it down to a smaller area. You also need to enable
compression on the raw file.
Rob
"Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I'm very pleased that you've separated the 'ice' and 'gem' features.
Seconded! I was intrigued to find that the ICE feature was a binary
option. Earlier versions of Vuescan gave me the impression that it
was a variable effect.
Rob
Guys, could we please take the LED discussions off the list? While they may
be interesting to the engineers amongst us, I don't think they're of much
interest to those who are subscribed to discuss filmscanning?
I think we can all agree that the mechanical components of a scanner are
more likely
101 - 200 of 1003 matches
Mail list logo
