Re: filmscanners: settings suggestions for epson 1600 pro?
In a message dated 11/4/2000 9:33:09 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. How do i set the focus for using the filmstrip holders with transparancy scanning? The epson seems to have two focus settings, one for glassplate level and one for the holders, which seems to be 2.5 mm difference.. the scan i just made was definitly not in focus.) It automatically uses the 2.5mm setting when doing transparency scanning, and the glassplate setting for normal scanning. If you want me to verify this, turn on the "Files|Output log file" option and do a scan. Then zip and e-mail vuescan.log to me. You can look yourself: 1) VueScan sends "ESC p" command 2) Scanner returns ACK (0x06) 3) VueScan sends focus position (0x00-0x4c is glass surface, 0x4d-0xff is 2.5mm above) 4) Scanner returns ACK (0x06) VueScan uses 0x59 for transparency mode, and 0x40 for flatbed mode. 2. Is it possible to restrict the preview and analysis(exposure, B-W pooint settings) to the small area of each of the images in the filmstrip holder, which contains four strips of six images ? Is there or can you make an option to save these settings, so they can be called anytime, without going through the hassle of resetting everything ? You might be able to do batch scanning with careful setting of the Crop options. You can set the number of frames across and down, as well as the spacing between frames across and down. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re(2): filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
Hi dan, First, tanks to take time to share your experiments with us! To date, I've been trough all the docs available on the RFS 3600 (even read the entire owner manual...) and could'nt find one line about the scan speed! How is yours doing? I'm particulary concerned about the max resolution scan (50 Mo), with and without auto-correction features. Also, how is the film autofeeder doing with uncut 36 fr. roll? -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 01:59:13 -0600, Dan Kimble wrote: I'm Sorry David but that is not true. I am taking a break from playing with the RFS 3600 I received today, to write this response. I am new to scanning but will try to answer any questions concerning the scanner. So far I like it. I am trying to find some images that I scanned with the SS4000 before I returned it to compare. So far I don't have any regrets returning the SS4000. Dan Kimble "Hemingway, David J" wrote: It's not shipping -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 11:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner Just came back from N.Y. photoexpo. Saw the new Kodak rfs 3600 scanner. Looks good but wondering if anyone has done a review on it yet, or has any personal experience with it . Dave Small
No Subject
Hi i am Henk. Just bought a Minolta Dimage dual II with USB. I hope someone can give me some clue why my scans are so dark. Is that because of i use the original software ? Do i have to buy Vuescan?. Or do i have to change settings. Sorry buti am a beginner , perhaps i do not belong here Thanks anyway..
filmscanners: HorizontalDiagonal dot pitch
on 11/3/00 8:52 PM, Frank Paris at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 4:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: Re: monitors i am a photographer with a PC, Nikon scanner and Epson 750 (eventually a 2000). i want to get a 20 inch monitor and would like some recommendations about what kind to get? thanks, Joanna By 20" monitors I presume you mean 20" viewable, since they hardly make nominal 20" monitors anymore, since the prices of 21 inchers have come down so much. At my last place of employment I got to observe several different 21" monitors, and at my current place of employment we all have the .24 aperture grill Trinitron tube driven by Sun electronics. The Trinitron tubes produce very bright, contrasty images, great for looking at scans. But the electronics that accompany them matter a lot. I've seen various incarnations by Sony (for example) that don't focus so well across the entire image. We pay Sun $2,000 for these monitors and they aren't even the top of the line Sony tube (the one with the .22 aperture grill is). Other vendors sell these things for $1,000 to $1,200 or thereabouts, and looking at the Sun implementation you can see where the money is going: in the electronics. They are razor sharp from corner to corner at 1600X1200, so even text looks sharp on these monitors, whereas in other incarnations these tubes are better for graphics than text. Unfortunately, if you have razor sharp eyes, you will be able to see the pixels in your scans at this resolution, and so I prefer to run 21" monitors at higher resolutions than this. I can't vouch for what the Sun looks like at higher resolutions, because the workstations we got from HP don't support resolutions higher than 1600X1200, even though the graphic subsystems cost $1,500 on these systems! They are optimized for doing 3-D graphics, not 2-D, which is what digital darkroom stuff is all about (so you're talking $200 for a video card, max). In standard black matrix tubes, what I can vouch for are the Hitachi line of monitors, the 81x series. These monitors were the sharpest in the building at my last place of employment and had good color saturation and contrast, although not rivalling the Trinitron tubes. What they excel at is razor sharp text, unlike the Trinitron tubes (unless you pay an outrageous sum like my current employer is with the $2,000 Suns). Hitachi pretty much invented the resolution 1856X1392, because at that resolution, the horizontal dot pitch (.22mm) lines up with the pixel resolution and you get awesome clarity and sharpness (work the math and you'll see this is true: this is a standard 4:3 aspect ratio tube with a 20" diagonal viewable screen). Text at 100% will be uncomfortably small for most people at this resolution. The solution is simple: run at a higher text size. I run at 125%, which will still be too small for many people, so just keep going higher til you can read the text comfortably. There are two advantages to running monitors at as high a resolution as possible (without suffering image degradation due to bandwidth limitations). First, text then becomes well rounded (when magnified at 125% or 150% or whatever is comfortable to you), and are all the more easy on the eyes. In other words, typefaces can be more accurately rendered at standard reading sizes (10 to 12 points). Second, and important for viewing scanned images, the pixels are so small at resolutions higher than 1600X1200 that they are just beyond the ability of even the sharpest eyes to resolve at a standard viewing distance of 18". So therefore the images look silky smooth. The old standard was running monitors at 72 dpi, which is well within the sharp human eye to resolve. But at 1856 horizontal across 16", we're talking 116 dpi. Eventually, our monitors will actually display 300 dpi, and we'll all be viewing text at 300 - 400% "normal". Of course by then we won't be buying tube monitors, but they will be built on some other technology (perhaps not even CCD). At 1856X1392, you are pushing the bandwidth of the Hitachi 813, so I would recommend the top of the line Hitachi 814, which can be had for about $1250. In fact, I would not recommend the Hitachi 814, but rather the Cornerstone p1700 (available from www.MonitorsDirect.com), which uses the same tube but has electronics slightly more refined than Hitachi's own electronics. I paid $1,200 for my Cornerstone p1700 which I bought for home use. I don't know of any video card manufacturer that supports this odd resolution (which should actually be an industry standard, since so many tube manufacturers use a .22 horizontal dot pitch (another aside: when you see tube manufactuers quoting .26 dot pitch, this usually means diagonal dot pitch, which translates to .22 horizontal))
Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Hello Tony, TONY HUGS !!! People think I am nuts, in my circle of friends for not doing image editing on my laptop. Thank you so much for putting it into print. I am new to the list and my just like it here. Thanks again, Guy Friday, November 03, 2000, 11:46:00 PM, you wrote: what do people think about LCD monitors like the Apple 15" flat panel display TS They are lovely and personally I far prefer working with one - no eye TS strain at all on this here laptop, due to the absolute sharpness of every TS pixel. However, they are no good for critical image editing, they have a TS completely different, limited and weird-shaped gamut and gamma to CRT's. TS They are getting better, but I've not yet heard of any suitable for TS graphics. Great for email tho' :) TS Regards TS Tony Sleep TS http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner TS info comparisons
Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Wow, some very informative information here. I have been running Viewsonic's products for years. And buying them for our small company. I am sure you can do better, but how much more are you willing to spend? I can't use the Sony monitors, or any other brand that uses the Trinitron tube. They have two visible stripes running horizontally across the middle of the monitor. Although, that was a while back, they may have removed those. But when you are spending time pouring over editing your photos, the last thing you want is two stripes right in the middle of it all. I have also been buying the Matrox G400 max. Yeah, that 360mhz RAMDAC is awesome for 2D work. If you can find a cool local dealer, maybe they would be willing to let you try a few out. See what YOU think. Guy Friday, November 03, 2000, 7:15:33 PM, you wrote: E Sony G-500 E Sincerely. E Ezio E www.lucenti.com e-photography site E - Original Message - E From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 1:53 AM E Subject: filmscanners: Re: monitors i am a photographer with a PC, Nikon scanner and Epson 750 (eventually a 2000). i want to get a 20 inch monitor and would like some recommendations about what kind to get? thanks, Joanna
RE: filmscanners: HorizontalDiagonal dot pitch
I am wondering about the math on the diagonal vs horizontal dot pitch conversion. Looks to me like 0.28 diagonal (not 0.26) is closer to 0.22 horizontal. On a 3-4-5 proportioned rectangle, the horizontal is 0.8 * diagonal, so 0.8 * 0.28 = 0.224. Am I missing something? --Berry The Hitachi has a .22 horizontal and a .14 vertical pitch. This works out to a .26 diagonal. I guess I assumed without working the math that other manufacturers who claim .26 diagonal dot pitch had the same proportional dot as the Hitachi, which is not 3-4-5. In any case, my 814 was the sharpest monitor on the floor, but we did not buy monitors for high end graphics, but to get as much real estate as possible for C++ program development. Most developers ran their 21" monitors at 1600X1200 or even 1280X1024. I did not seem to be able to get the concept across to them that running their monitors at higher resolution and magnified fonts would produce more readable screens. We could configure our development boxes any way we wanted, and developers seemed to trade off video card quality for other features they wanted. I thought it was a bad trade-off. From reviews I've read, there are other monitors that are as sharp as Hitachi tubes. I just don't have experience with them, except for those over-the-top Sun monitors using the Trinitron tubes with the .24 aperture grill. I've also seen lots of 17" monitors that were very sharp but had very poor color saturation and contrast, and totally unsuited for what we do as film scanners. With the Hitachi and Cornerstone monitors, you don't have to worry about that. The Hitachi 752 is an amazingly sharp 19" monitor that you get get for less than $500, for those on a budget. I have one of those at home as well as my Cornerstone p1700. I believe Cornerstone makes an equivalent to the Hitachi 752 that might even be a little cheaper. But I don't see how Cornerstone could possibly improve on the sharpness of the 752. It is simply awesome. and has great color saturation and contrast, although not quite up to a good implementation of a Trinitron monitor. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Julie, female Galah (3 1/2 years and going strong at the moment) Little Birdie, male Splendid Parakeet (13 years) Snowflake, male cockatiel (12 years) http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
filmscanners: FS: virtually new SS4k...
I have a virtually new SprintScan 4k for sale. It has very little use, has an extra set of negative and slide holders...original box etc. Comes with latest version of Polaroid Insight, latest firmware, latest drivers, manuals, cables, SCSI card etc. Everything that came with it when I bought it a few months ago. Only reason I am selling it, is because I subsequently bought a Leafscan 45, and don't need the SS4k any more. It is a GREAT scanner, mind you. $1200/bo Still under warranty, 5 day right of return. This was NOT a refurbished unit, and currently sells for $1450 from CTC South (where I bought this one from).
RE: Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design and as far as I know will always be there. I know, it is a nuisance. I'm always mistaking them for a scratch on the film, for that's just about what they look like. I prefer the black matrix tubes, because the best of them provide sufficient color saturation and contrast for image editing and viewing, and generally are better for reading text. If you have very sharp eyes, the vertical aperture grill on Trinitron will also be visible to you and could be bothersome unless the display is very sharply focused, as are our Sun monitors. Basically, they are so sharp that I am willing to put up with the visibility of the aperture grill. I haven't seen the .22 aperture grill versions. That should be narrow enough so you can't see it, but I can definitely see it on the .24 versions from 18". Some Viewsonic monitors are very expensive, some aren't. Depends on what you want and the bandwidth you want. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Julie, female Galah (3 1/2 years and going strong at the moment) 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 Guy Prince Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 9:21 AM To: Ezio Subject: Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors Wow, some very informative information here. I have been running Viewsonic's products for years. And buying them for our small company. I am sure you can do better, but how much more are you willing to spend? I can't use the Sony monitors, or any other brand that uses the Trinitron tube. They have two visible stripes running horizontally across the middle of the monitor. Although, that was a while back, they may have removed those. But when you are spending time pouring over editing your photos, the last thing you want is two stripes right in the middle of it all. I have also been buying the Matrox G400 max. Yeah, that 360mhz RAMDAC is awesome for 2D work. If you can find a cool local dealer, maybe they would be willing to let you try a few out. See what YOU think. Guy
Re: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Frank Paris wrote: The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design and as far as I know will always be there. I know, it is a nuisance. I'm always mistaking them for a scratch on the film, for that's just about what Those lines are shadows of wires used to tension the grill (or something like that), so as I understand it, they'll pretty much stay there. Once I had a Sun branded 25" monitor at work (made by Sony I understand) and I think that huge tube had three wires as I recall. In any case, one doesn't notice them pretty soon after using it, and even then one usually could only notice them when looking for them on solid light (like white) backgrounds in normal use, or in really critical viewing. I really really liked that monitor. Mike K. P.S. - Changed jobs, just have a 19" non-trinitron monitor on my work 'pewter now. Home one is an older 21" non-trinitron (Philips) monitor, so I can't complain.
filmscanners: Re:
A few scanning tips - Scanner Help - Basics 101http://www.scantips.com - Original Message - From: Henk Zegwaard To: Filmscanners Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 7:41 AM Hi i am Henk. Just bought a Minolta Dimage dual II with USB. I hope someone can give me some clue why my scans are so dark. Is that because of i use the original software ? Do i have to buy Vuescan?. Or do i have to change settings. Sorry buti am a beginner , perhaps i do not belong here Thanks anyway..
Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 Extended Service Contracts
I found the descriptions of their various levels of service at http://www.polaroid.com/service/warranties/digital/scanners.html At the bottom of the (long) page you will find buttons for "Pricing", "Terms", "Features", and "How to Purchase". --Dana -- From: JimD [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 Extended Service Contracts Date: Saturday, November 04, 2000 8:26 AM Dana, Can you point me to where I can find more info on 'Polaroid Gold service contracts'. Given that my ss4000 failed 4 months after I bought it and used it only lightly I'm starting to think that an extended service contract might be prudent. Thanks, Jim Dobbins
Re: filmscanners: FS: virtually new SS4k...
Regarding the SS 4000 for sale: Does it include Silverfast 5? Please state this up front for all to see/know. Also, B/H in NYC is selling a new unit for about $1350 less a $100.oo discount from Polaroid. Note: buy.com in California has had the best price for this item in the past. Look for their $30.oo discount coupon as well. Finally, the SS 4000 might be ready to come down in price since there are new comparable scanners just introduced (Kodak) or about to be (rumors of new Nikon 3500-4000dpi). So all in all, $1200 is not even close to being a reasonable price for a used SS4000. Robert DeCandido, PhD Austin Franklin wrote: I have a virtually new SprintScan 4k for sale. It has very little use, has an extra set of negative and slide holders...original box etc. Comes with latest version of Polaroid Insight, latest firmware, latest drivers, manuals, cables, SCSI card etc. Everything that came with it when I bought it a few months ago. Only reason I am selling it, is because I subsequently bought a Leafscan 45, and don't need the SS4k any more. It is a GREAT scanner, mind you. $1200/bo Still under warranty, 5 day right of return. This was NOT a refurbished unit, and currently sells for $1450 from CTC South (where I bought this one from).
Re: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
Raymond,
I spent the first day of scanning using the scanner without reading the
manual. So before you take these observations as gospel, I think
I should read manual and experiment some more. Please note that my
previous experience with film scanners is limited to the SS4000. But
preliminary observations are as follows.
calibration: approx. 45 seconds (manual mode)
The unit does a calibration at the beginning of the film roll or you can
select to have it do a calibration before each frame ( I don't think I
will use the latter very often).
Pre Scan: approx. 11 sec. (for single frame that is already loaded)
The pre scan of a 4 frame strip was approx. 82 sec..
These pre scan times actually seem pretty quick. (Compared to the SS4000
that is.)
Auto focus (slides only): approx. 15 sec (manual operation)
I haven't found in the manual yet if the the software automatically does
a auto focus before each slide, or if I must manually click on the auto
focus button before each scan. Kodak does advertise that the unit does
not support batch scanning of mounted slides, but what about an uncut
roll of slide film??? I guess I'll soon find out.
Scan of slide at 3600 dpi: took approx. 125 sec. (two minutes 5 sec..)
which sounds like a long time but I think the convenience of the
unattended 36 frame batch scan mode more than makes up for the scan
time.
The film strip feed mechanism is very smooth. It works like a dollar
bill changer, you start the feed then the unit pulls the film in. It
works much better than I expected.
I don't have any uncut 36 frame (or 37 frame) film strips to test yet.
My only concern is that my camera (Nikon F100) always gets 37 frames per
roll so I am wondering how the unit will react.
The only scans that I kept from the SS4000 were made using Vuescan set
to 4000dpi with a reduction factor of 4 which I thought produced
excellent results. Since I can't use Vuescan with the RFS3600 yet I feel
there is no fair comparison. I did make a scan at 3600dpi of the same
image and then within Photoshop used the print size feature to reduce
the dpi by a factor of 4. This gave me an output of 900dpi as compared
to the 1000dpi scan from the SS4000 using Vuescan, and upon magnifying
both images to 300% i did notice that the SS4000 did have a bit better
detail. But isn't this expected?? I am not sure if the process I used to
compare is valid. Another very important point I should make here is
that even though the SS4000 scan was slightly cleaner using my makeshift
test, I actually preferred the image of the RFS3600. The colors looked a
bit more accurate.
I am sorry but I am not familiar with the term "50 Mo" in the following
statement, but if you will explain it to me I will see if I can help you
with this. ("I'm particularly concerned about the max. resolution
scan (50 Mo), with and without auto-correction features.")
I had better get to reading the manual to get better aquatinted with the
abilities and function of the unit.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi dan,
First, tanks to take time to share your experiments with us! To date,
I've been trough all the docs available on the RFS 3600 (even read the
entire owner manual...) and could'nt find one line about the scan speed!
How is yours doing? I'm particulary concerned about the max resolution
scan (50 Mo), with and without auto-correction features. Also, how is the
film autofeeder doing with uncut 36 fr. roll?
--
Have a good day!
Raymond Carles
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 01:59:13 -0600, Dan Kimble wrote:
I'm Sorry David but that is not true. I am taking a break from playing
with the RFS 3600 I received today, to write this response. I am new to
scanning but will try to answer any questions concerning the scanner. So
far I like it. I am trying to find some images that I scanned with the
SS4000 before I returned it to compare. So far I don't have any regrets
returning the SS4000.
Dan Kimble
"Hemingway, David J" wrote:
It's not shipping
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 11:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
Just came back from N.Y. photoexpo. Saw the new Kodak rfs 3600 scanner.
Looks
good but wondering if anyone has done a review on it yet, or has any
personal
experience with it .
Dave Small
Re[4]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Saturday, November 04, 2000, 10:51:34 AM, you wrote: FP The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design FP and as far as I know will always be there. Rats. FP Some Viewsonic monitors are very expensive, some aren't. Depends on what you FP want and the bandwidth you want. Well, yeah. I believe I am on the low-end of the scale. At work we do our own color brochures, labels for product, technical papers and advertisements. So the P810 (I believe it is the P series, may be the G) is what I chose. Since it was only about 650 dollars, it fit the bill. This last week I bought the Nikon LS-30 and found that I needed some new skills to run the darn thing. I have an old HP 6100c that can handle the basics, but needed the film scanner for some upcoming projects. I do have some questions, but was going to lurk around to see if I could get them answered. Guy
Re: filmscanners: Re: monitors
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design and as far as I know will always be there. Tubes that use an aperture grid, such as some of Mitsubishi's, are a better compromise between the severe tonal aperture errors with shadow-mask tubes, and the striped Trinitron design. See what WCI have to say about them: http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/info/computer.html Regards, Pete.
Re: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
Thanks much for the info you have given us on the rfs 3600. It's a big help. Wondering if you tried to scan black white negs. and if so how were the results? Dave Small
RE: Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design and as far as I know will always be there. Yes, they hold the aperture grill on...
Re: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
Sorry, but I don't have any BW negatives to test, but I do have a roll of that Kodak BW film that uses the C-41 process. I will shoot it when I have a chance and try it. One thing I forgot to mention in the previous post is that so far every frame I have scanned needed very little if any adjustments. I've used a little sharpen, brightness, and contrast. But of course this is to my taste. And this applies to Fuji film (which is my film of choice) as well as Kodak types. This really helps a newbie like me. I also should that I have no connection, or special interest with the Kodak or Polaroid companies and that this is just another one of my hobbies. Dan K. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks much for the info you have given us on the rfs 3600. It's a big help. Wondering if you tried to scan black white negs. and if so how were the results? Dave Small
filmscanners: Re: (No Subject)
Just bought a Minolta Dimage dual II with USB. I hope someone can give me some clue why my scans are so dark. How do you know they are dark? Have you calibrated your monitor!? Is that because of i use the original software ? Probably not Do i have to buy Vuescan?. There's no obligation:) Or do i have to change settings. Most likely. Especially investigate gamma settings, which alter the brightness of midtone values whilst leaving the black and white points alone. But make sure your monitor is set up properly first. You might find some helpful background info at my site which will help you understand. Sorry but i am a beginner , perhaps i do not belong here Of course you do:) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re[3]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
TONY HUGS !!! People think I am nuts, in my circle of friends for not doing image editing on my laptop. Thank you so much for putting it into print. I am new to the list and my just like it here. Thanks again, I have the laptop I use for email and accounts and stuff right next to the monitor I use on a different PC for imaging stuff. Displaying the same image on the two screens, using the same software, it's clearly a very bad idea to imagine the TFT is adequate. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re[2]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
p I watched a rep from a big name company trying to demo one of their filmscanners p on a laptop recently. Sigh. Misguided foos. I went to a dealer day at a local camera shop and got to touch a Nikon D1. But it was awesome, not fuzzy at all.
Re[4]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Well then, I am taking mine off. They make everything all fuzzy. Saturday, November 04, 2000, 2:50:02 PM, you wrote: The two horizontal lines on Trinitron monitors are intrinsic to the design and as far as I know will always be there. AF Yes, they hold the aperture grill on...
filmscanners: Re:
A shot in the darkMake sure you haven't selected 16bit linear color depth in the preferences dialog. Bob Wright - Original Message - From: Henk Zegwaard To: Filmscanners Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 7:41 AM Hi i am Henk. Just bought a Minolta Dimage dual II with USB. I hope someone can give me some clue why my scans are so dark. Is that because of i use the original software ? Do i have to buy Vuescan?. Or do i have to change settings. Sorry buti am a beginner , perhaps i do not belong here Thanks anyway..
Re[4]: filmscanners: Re: monitors
Tony, I have been forced into laptopdom because of space. We had to buy a home about 1/4 the size of the rental home we had. My computer/photography lab was sacrificed. Although I do have a large two car detached garage with power, water, sewer, gas and ethernet in there. Within the year we should have my darkroom set up, and my PC is already in there. But when I want to be warm and comfy, I sit in the living room (big enough for 5 people on two sofas) with my laptop and pretend everything is rosey while watching Lawrence Welk. Tonight's show showcases Walt Disney. Guy TS I have the laptop I use for email and accounts and stuff right next to the TS monitor I use on a different PC for imaging stuff. Displaying the same TS image on the two screens, using the same software, it's clearly a very bad TS idea to imagine the TFT is adequate.
Re: filmscanners: kodak rfs 3600 scanner
"Mo" is "Mega-octets," French for "Megabytes!"
