[filmscanners] Re: Leaf35 - was - RE: Lawrence's request ;-) - was -RE: Re: OT - Informed opinion debate/cle
Thanks Austin, I have asked the questions and am awaiting a response. Simon Austin Franklin wrote: > Hi Simon, > > I strongly suggest when getting a Leaf, make sure it's the latest version, > with both GPIB and SCSI ports. The early ones were only GPIB. Also, make > sure the firmware cartridge is version 4.1, and that it comes with BOTH (if > it's a 35) the film holder and slide holder. If you want to use it on a PC, > you need a GPIB card, on a Mac, you do not. The software is readily > available for both. On the Mac, it's a PS plug-in, and on the PC it's a > standalone application. > > Any other questions, please feel free to ask! > > Regards, > > Austin > > > Austin > > > > There is a Leaf 35 on eBay. They do work on PC and not just MAC > > I presume. > > When you say fixed focus, what does that mean in scanner terms (I use a > > Nikon LS30 and do not focus as such). > > > > Simon > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 26 February 2002 23:34 > > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Lawrence's request ;-) - was -RE: Re: OT - > > Informed opinion debate/cle > > > > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > Check eBay... BTW, if you only scan 35mm, the Leaf 35 is a nice option, > > for > > > what I consider, a very reasonable price...around $500 or less. Only > > > difference is it's fixed focus, only does 35mm and is only > > 4000SPI. Same > > > electronics as the Leaf 45 with the sensor masked off. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > If and when you sell the Leaf, put me on the list for potential > > > > purchasers! > > > > > > > > Simon Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Scanners on EBay
Looked up ebay at the scanner price and noticed that there is a Minolta multi Scan pro at a buy price of $3195.00 http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2006042126 Yet B&H Photo in NY has them listed at $2879.00 ( that's even a little high compared to Aust.) Just goes to show thing must be good if you buy them at inflated prices on eBay. The Leaf 35 BTW is at http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2005793685 Rob Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Colormatching with Canon S820/S900
>> I believe some users say they get usable Vuescanned images >> straight off their scanners, without much tweaking in >> Photoshop. I've certainly had some excellent results direct from VS. I'm by no means a professional photographer; the following examples are holiday shots, all taken with a Canon EOS300, and processed at Boots*. They were scanned on my LS-40 with Vuescan, saved as Jpegs, and the only post-processing I've done is to crop and shrink them to post to the web. http://www.otway.com/photos/Film057_Pic020.jpg http://www.otway.com/photos/Film058_Pic025.jpg http://www.otway.com/photos/Film060_Pic018.jpg http://www.otway.com/photos/Film056_Pic035.jpg They could probably be improved with some manipulation, but I'm very pleased with the direct results, and haven't had enough time to find my way around all of the adjustment facilities in Photoshop 6. In particular I've got to have a look at PS6's clean up functions to see if I can remove the hair from the top RHS of the fourth photo - it seems a hair got stick on the len without us noticing! Mark * A chain of pharmacy stores in the UK, for those not familiar with the name. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Colormatching with Canon S820/S900
>> I doubt that's a hair on or near the lens. Although you >> used a wide angle lens, I'd be very surprised it could focus >> that close to the lens or even a filter ring. I just used a normal lens (the one that came as standard on the Canon). I don't have any extra lenses yet, although I want to get a telephoto for wildlife photography at some point. I also don't have any filter rings (and wouldn't have the faintest idea what filters I should even consider buying/using!). I'm fairly certain it was a hair on the lens, as 8 other pictures taken from the same day have the hair in precisely the same place, and the same line marks the prints that I got when the negatives were developed, before I'd even scanned them. It's unlikely to be a hair that got caught up in the development process, as the only pictures on that film with the hair in them were those taken on the same day that the picture I posted was taken. >> If it isn't a real hair stuck in the slide mount or on the >> negs (I'm not sure what type of film was used), or it could >> have been a hair actually in the camera at or near the film >> plane. The film was just 35mm Fuji film (can't remember which exact type). Mark Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Colormatching with Canon S820/S900
Hi Mark, If it is a normal lens I can almost absolutely state it was not on the lens. There is no way a "normal" (45-55mm) lens can focus at the lens surface. I assume this Canon 300 is an SLR with exchangeable lenses, Your explanation pretty much clinches it. It was a hair stuck between the film and the focal plane shutter, very near the film surface. I had this happen once myself. It usually gets stuck in the baffling or the flocked light damping material, or sometimes in the shutter mechanism itself. It can fall out of that area, just from the camera being bumped or finally just from the film going by or it gets caught on a film socket and gets dragged out as the film goes by. It is not the fault of the processing, you indeed made a "contact neg" of the hair. Even at maximum depth of field (like F/16 or f/22 or whatever you lens stops down to) I would be surprised in a normal lens (45-55mm) could focus more than to about 6-9 inches from the front lens surface. Try it with a string, or you finger. This hair is in pretty sharp focus for most of its length. Otherwise you have a spectacular macro lens ;-) Anyway, I sent you a private email to explain how to use the cloning tool in Photoshop, and also a corrected version of the image. I hope that is helpful. Art Mark Otway wrote: >>>I doubt that's a hair on or near the lens. Although you >>>used a wide angle lens, I'd be very surprised it could focus >>>that close to the lens or even a filter ring. >>> > > I just used a normal lens (the one that came as standard on the Canon). > I don't have any extra lenses yet, although I want to get a telephoto > for wildlife photography at some point. I also don't have any filter > rings (and wouldn't have the faintest idea what filters I should even > consider buying/using!). > > I'm fairly certain it was a hair on the lens, as 8 other pictures taken > from the same day have the hair in precisely the same place, and the > same line marks the prints that I got when the negatives were developed, > before I'd even scanned them. It's unlikely to be a hair that got caught > up in the development process, as the only pictures on that film with > the hair in them were those taken on the same day that the picture I > posted was taken. > > >>>If it isn't a real hair stuck in the slide mount or on the >>>negs (I'm not sure what type of film was used), or it could >>>have been a hair actually in the camera at or near the film >>>plane. >>> > > The film was just 35mm Fuji film (can't remember which exact type). > > Mark > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280
Interesting review for printing from digital cameras. Too bad they only used lower resolution images than the ones common on this list. There's a lot of resampling, sharpening, interpolation, etc. going on in the print drivers when the best source is a 2000x3000 that was already interpolated in camera. (not that I'd turn down a D1x if one dropped in my lap ;-) )The review also was a bit too reliant on the "select & go" options for the printers instead of manual tweaking. I'm suspicious of speed tests on a PC so starved for RAM: Win98, 1.4 Ghz P4 but only 128 MB RAM. Someone really should've caught that. BobG (1280 owner) At 02:43 AM 2/27/2002, you wrote: >I just read this review which says the Canon S9000 images look better than >the Epson 1280. >Any one here have any personal experience with the Canon? How good is the >Color profile? > >http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3373126,00.html > > >Bob Kehl > > > >Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe >filmscanners' >or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title >or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: What's on the negative? (was colormatichingwith Canon)
Bernie Kubiak wrote: > The hair (or whatever) isn't likely on the lens but inside the camera, > somewhere between the lens and the film. Unless you're using a very > small f stop, a hair on the lens likely wouldn't show. The other > prospect is sloppy processing. As much as some labs are deserving of having a finger pointed to them for defects, this hair situation cannot be a lab defect, since it is on the neg itself. Short of a hair really sticking to the film throughout the development process and then falling off afterward, (which is nearly impossible) I can't think of how this could happen during development. Also, hairs being cylindrical, their actual surface contact area is extremely minimal and most photo chemistry would get around it. So I agree with your first suspicion. > > When you're getting used to a camera, shoot slide film. The slide is an > original image and you'll get a much better idea of what you're doing > rather than the photo processor's work or having to "interpret" a > negative. When you do scan the slide, you have a sample you can match > to. Once you get a good idea of what's going on you can go back to > using print film if you choose. > This is particularly a good recommendation with a brand new camera. Since neg films are very forgiving of exposure errors, and further since the print is a secondary interpretation of the neg allowing for even further adjustment, I always recommend people shoot a roll of slides to test the exposure meter, apertures, shutter speeds, etc. Slight errors are more obvious on slide film, and as stated above, it is the original, but also final image. Art Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: hariry pics
Just as a final thought, I don't even think the hair could have been on the back surface of the lens, as that too would not be in correct focus at the film plane. Art Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] OT: Choosing a high End CRT
Hi, this is off-topic, but your comment would certainly be of great value to me. Im thinking about getting a new display. Im studying architecture an will uses the display for various work from CAD to advanced digital imaging and DPT work. It will be connected to a high end workstation running Windows 2000(VGA is a Elsa GLoria III) and replace a 17 EIZO FlexScan T562-T. Im running a resolution of 1280x1024 pixels on this CRT and the main reason Id like to replace it is to be able to run a higher resolution (the GLoria III supports up to 2048 x 1536 pixels). Im looking to a high end 21-24 CRT. Any suggestions? I took a closer look at the latest Eizo 21 CRTs Eizo F980 and Eizo F956, the 21 Sony F520 and their 24 model FW900. Any comments on these models? Any other models and brands I should consider? The problem is, I need a very high resolution for CAD (>1600x1200) and excellent colour accuracy for DTP and digital imaging work. Im looking forward to read your comments. cu Flo Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: OT: Choosing a high End CRT
--- Moreno Polloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The biggest issue for me was that the newer flatscreen CRT's I tried > were > not as sharp in the edges as some of the curved screen models. In the > end, I > went with a digital LCD. Perfectly sharp from edge to edge, and with > a > custom profile, the colours are just fine for my needs. Which LCD did you buy? What other LCDs did you consider? I would appreciate some input as I am planing to get a new monitor. Thanks __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion! http://greetings.yahoo.com Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: OT - Informed opinion debate/cle
Hi Peter, > Austin > > Yes, I do have a web site. It's main purpose is pitching my > business -- I'm a > conservation architect (in the US I would be called an historical > architect, or > preservation specialist, or some such thing). Cool! Do you know much about Gothic Revival Victorian architecture (~1840-1860)? > Among the promotional guff are a few small collections of images, > such as these: Very nice! And see, even you have some images on-line ;-) ...and you're not NEAR as "informed" as "our friend" is, I'm sure! So, wouldn't you expect someone as "informed" as "our friend", to have a simply blazing web site, or at least some simply outstanding images...done with barely little effort? Or, at least that he would do the honor of sharing with us some of those "informed" images...I mean, what's the big deal? What good is all this information if you don't really know how to use it ;-) Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280
The review does not seen to address the issue of print longevity. We know what to expect with the Epson. Does anyone have longevity information for the Canon, ie; has Wilhelm tested it? Regards, Ron Carlson - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:43 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280 > I just read this review which says the Canon S9000 images look better than > the Epson 1280. > Any one here have any personal experience with the Canon? How good is the > Color profile? > > http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3373126,00.html > > > Bob Kehl > > > -- -- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: OT: Choosing a high End CRT
>> But the Sony is very fuzzy (even at only 1280 x 1024) while the Mitsubishi is very sharp even at 1920 x 1440 (the highest my card goes). << I've had similar observations. I don't know what happened to Sony. Their monitors used to be among the best. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Epson 1640XL with Document Feeder
I am looking at purchasing the Epson 1640XL with the document feeder and am interested in hearing from anyone what has the scanner and document feeder combination. We are a printer that is needs to scan books one page at a time for reprints. Doug Wise [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: OT: Choosing a high End CRT
No, Mitsubishi designed and made their own -- I think the Sony patent expired? Many people have reported that the Mitsubishi version is to be preferred -- but of course they all make their fair share of duds, and the video card used has some bearing on it too... Charles >Don't the Sony and Mitsubishi use the same tubes? > >rob > >Bill Fernandez wrote: > >> Florian-- >> >> I have a Mitsubishi 2040U (replaced by the 2060U) and a Sony GDM >> F500R, both 21" monitors, sitting next to each other. Both have >> aperture grill CRTs. >> >> They both calibrate & profile nicely with OptiCal and the Monitor Spyder. >> >> But the Sony is very fuzzy (even at only 1280 x 1024) while the >> Mitsubishi is very sharp even at 1920 x 1440 (the highest my card >> goes). >> >> The Sony also needs its convergence adjusted more often, converges >> less precisely across the screen, and it's dark bias drifts both in >> color and intensity. It also cost significantly more than the >> Mitsubishi. >> >> Needless to say I'm very happy with the Mitsubishi and will avoid >> buying Sonys in the future. >> >> --Bill >> > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280
Yes, Wilhelm rates the Canon Photo Paper Pro at 25+ years. This is not as good as Epson's Archival inks and papers as used on the Epson 2000P, but it is better than the Epson 1280, which is only rated for 25 years using matte paper. The glossy Photo Paper for the 1280 is rated at about 7-8 years I believe. Not too impressive IMHO. I love the quality (and longevity) of my Epson 2000P, but the Canon might be a path to upgrade resolution a bit. I scan at 4000dpi and like to print at 13"x19". That's results in roughly 300dpi, but I'm not sure my Epson 2000P is benefiting from much over 200-250dpi. The Canon might. And 25 years would be enough for my uses. I'm still wondering if the color profiles are any good, though. Bob Kehl - Original Message - From: "Ron Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:41 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280 The review does not seen to address the issue of print longevity. We know what to expect with the Epson. Does anyone have longevity information for the Canon, ie; has Wilhelm tested it? Regards, Ron Carlson - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:43 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280 > I just read this review which says the Canon S9000 images look better than > the Epson 1280. > Any one here have any personal experience with the Canon? How good is the > Color profile? > > http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3373126,00.html > > > Bob Kehl > > > -- -- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280
Here's the link for the S9000 which links to the lightfastness tests page. BK - Original Message - From: "Ron Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:41 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280 The review does not seen to address the issue of print longevity. We know what to expect with the Epson. Does anyone have longevity information for the Canon, ie; has Wilhelm tested it? Regards, Ron Carlson - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 11:43 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Canon S9000 test better than Epson 1280 > I just read this review which says the Canon S9000 images look better than > the Epson 1280. > Any one here have any personal experience with the Canon? How good is the > Color profile? > > http://www.techtv.com/products/hardware/story/0,23008,3373126,00.html > > > Bob Kehl > > > -- -- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: OT: Choosing a high End CRT
The one fundamental thing on choosing a monitor is to buy the demo ( or at least have the seller hook up the one he is proposing to sell you, so you can see the images for yourself). They DO vary from sample to sample. You want to check a sharp image, and also a screenful of text, at a small font size. If the text is sharp, everything is likely to be. If the colors are smooth and pleasing, and the text is sharp, all is usually well, as far as sample variations are concerned. Just my experience. Hersch At 02:00 PM 02/28/2002 +1100, you wrote: >No, Mitsubishi designed and made their own -- I think the Sony patent expired? > >Many people have reported that the Mitsubishi version is to be preferred -- >but of course they all make their fair share of duds, and the video card >used has some bearing on it too... > >Charles > > >Don't the Sony and Mitsubishi use the same tubes? > > > >rob > > > >Bill Fernandez wrote: > > > >> Florian-- > >> > >> I have a Mitsubishi 2040U (replaced by the 2060U) and a Sony GDM > >> F500R, both 21" monitors, sitting next to each other. Both have > >> aperture grill CRTs. > >> > >> They both calibrate & profile nicely with OptiCal and the Monitor Spyder. > >> > >> But the Sony is very fuzzy (even at only 1280 x 1024) while the > >> Mitsubishi is very sharp even at 1920 x 1440 (the highest my card > >> goes). > >> > >> The Sony also needs its convergence adjusted more often, converges > >> less precisely across the screen, and it's dark bias drifts both in > >> color and intensity. It also cost significantly more than the > >> Mitsubishi. > >> > >> Needless to say I'm very happy with the Mitsubishi and will avoid > >> buying Sonys in the future. > >> > >> --Bill > >> > > > > >Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe >filmscanners' >or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title >or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: OT: Choosing a high End CRT
>> The one fundamental thing on choosing a monitor is to buy the demo ( or at least have the seller hook up the one he is proposing to sell you, so you can see the images for yourself). They DO vary from sample to sample. You want to check a sharp image, and also a screenful of text, at a small font size. If the text is sharp, everything is likely to be. If the colors are smooth and pleasing, and the text is sharp, all is usually well, as far as sample variations are concerned. Just my experience. << A few points to consider: A CRT will change slightly in the first couple of weeks of use. Usually it gets slightly better. Even if a dealer is willling to hook up a monitor for you, it requires at least a half hour warm up and stabilize. A white full screen image will give you a pretty good idea of the evenness of illumination and colour inconsistencies. And perhaps most importantly, there are differences between video cards that influence the sharpness of the image. If you view the monitor on a different brand/model of video card than you have, there's no guarantee the image will look the same when the monitor is hooked up to your own computer. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
