Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
same reason why i got my Nikon 4000ED. i knew how many slides i had to scan and i knew that good quality scans were going to cost me between $5 and $10 each in quantity. even at $1 each, i would have broke even. Herb - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 2:57 PM Subject: Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended Bob, for me the numbers (as in $) were against continued usage of the Photo CD. when I stopped, I had already spent the cost of a decent scanner on the Photo CDs. I popped for a Nikon Super Coolscan IV scanner and am not looking back. While it is taking more of my time to scan, I find I'm more selective in what I'm scanning and while its scanning, I'm doing something else. Plus with bigger files I can print bigger sizes.
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
- Original Message - From: "Bob Sullivan" Subject: Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended Ken & Shel, I have 3 or 400 scanned slides on Kodak CD's. This is the first batch to turn out so poorly. I'm looking for somewhere else to take my business. Bob, I presume that you have never managed to make a mistake in your life? Take the job back to the lab, explain what is wrong and ask them to correct it. I don't understand the drop it and run mentality that people have with regards to their labs. If they have done a good enough job in the past, they deserve the opportunity to correct their error. William Robb
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Bob, for me the numbers (as in $) were against continued usage of the Photo CD. when I stopped, I had already spent the cost of a decent scanner on the Photo CDs. I popped for a Nikon Super Coolscan IV scanner and am not looking back. While it is taking more of my time to scan, I find I'm more selective in what I'm scanning and while its scanning, I'm doing something else. Plus with bigger files I can print bigger sizes. -Original Message- From: Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended Ken & Shel, I have 3 or 400 scanned slides on Kodak CD's. This is the first batch to turn out so poorly. I'm looking for somewhere else to take my business. I would think about doing it myself, but like I said before, I don't need any more time sitting in front of the computer screen. Regards, Bob S. On 5/31/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed > at all. > > I suspect, Photo CD's are like any other photographic process done > commercially - If you find a good processor, that takes the time and wants to > do a good job, stick with them. > I never received Photo CD scans that were bad enough to warrant rescanning, > but if I had I would have gone back to the processor and demanded a rescan. > By accepting poor quality scans (like anything else), you're just supporting > poor quality. > > -Original Message----- > From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended > > A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed > at all. If you've got a lot of slides or film to scan, you'd be ahead of > the game economically to get a good film scanner, and with a little > practice and reading of some on-line tutorials, you'll be getting better > results in short order. > > I don't recall now, but can you get a 16-bit TIFF file from a Photo CD? > > Shel > > "When you find yourself beginning to feel a bond between yourself and the > people you photograph, when you laugh and cry with their laughter and > tears, you will know you are on the right track." - Arthur Fellig > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Kenneth Waller > > > I was told by a local processor, several years ago, that Kodak had > stopped supporting the scanning equipment needed to produce the Photo CD. > Local processor was keeping it going on their own. Last time I checked, > several years ago now, they were still offering Photo CD's. > > > > BTW, I have around 1000 images done by local processor on Photo CD and I > could always improve the resulting scans somewhat by resetting white > point/black point even tho the original slide exposures were spot on. > > I was paying between $1.25 to $1.75 each scan. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > > > > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com > > PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Ken & Shel, I have 3 or 400 scanned slides on Kodak CD's. This is the first batch to turn out so poorly. I'm looking for somewhere else to take my business. I would think about doing it myself, but like I said before, I don't need any more time sitting in front of the computer screen. Regards, Bob S. On 5/31/05, Kenneth Waller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed > at all. > > I suspect, Photo CD's are like any other photographic process done > commercially - If you find a good processor, that takes the time and wants to > do a good job, stick with them. > I never received Photo CD scans that were bad enough to warrant rescanning, > but if I had I would have gone back to the processor and demanded a rescan. > By accepting poor quality scans (like anything else), you're just supporting > poor quality. > > -Original Message----- > From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended > > A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed > at all. If you've got a lot of slides or film to scan, you'd be ahead of > the game economically to get a good film scanner, and with a little > practice and reading of some on-line tutorials, you'll be getting better > results in short order. > > I don't recall now, but can you get a 16-bit TIFF file from a Photo CD? > > Shel > > "When you find yourself beginning to feel a bond between yourself and the > people you photograph, when you laugh and cry with their laughter and > tears, you will know you are on the right track." - Arthur Fellig > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Kenneth Waller > > > I was told by a local processor, several years ago, that Kodak had > stopped supporting the scanning equipment needed to produce the Photo CD. > Local processor was keeping it going on their own. Last time I checked, > several years ago now, they were still offering Photo CD's. > > > > BTW, I have around 1000 images done by local processor on Photo CD and I > could always improve the resulting scans somewhat by resetting white > point/black point even tho the original slide exposures were spot on. > > I was paying between $1.25 to $1.75 each scan. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > > > > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com > >
RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
>A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed at all. I suspect, Photo CD's are like any other photographic process done commercially - If you find a good processor, that takes the time and wants to do a good job, stick with them. I never received Photo CD scans that were bad enough to warrant rescanning, but if I had I would have gone back to the processor and demanded a rescan. By accepting poor quality scans (like anything else), you're just supporting poor quality. -Original Message- From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed at all. If you've got a lot of slides or film to scan, you'd be ahead of the game economically to get a good film scanner, and with a little practice and reading of some on-line tutorials, you'll be getting better results in short order. I don't recall now, but can you get a 16-bit TIFF file from a Photo CD? Shel "When you find yourself beginning to feel a bond between yourself and the people you photograph, when you laugh and cry with their laughter and tears, you will know you are on the right track." - Arthur Fellig > [Original Message] > From: Kenneth Waller > I was told by a local processor, several years ago, that Kodak had stopped supporting the scanning equipment needed to produce the Photo CD. Local processor was keeping it going on their own. Last time I checked, several years ago now, they were still offering Photo CD's. > > BTW, I have around 1000 images done by local processor on Photo CD and I could always improve the resulting scans somewhat by resetting white point/black point even tho the original slide exposures were spot on. > I was paying between $1.25 to $1.75 each scan. > > Kenneth Waller PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
A friend showed me several discs of Photo CD scans and I was not impressed at all. If you've got a lot of slides or film to scan, you'd be ahead of the game economically to get a good film scanner, and with a little practice and reading of some on-line tutorials, you'll be getting better results in short order. I don't recall now, but can you get a 16-bit TIFF file from a Photo CD? Shel "When you find yourself beginning to feel a bond between yourself and the people you photograph, when you laugh and cry with their laughter and tears, you will know you are on the right track." - Arthur Fellig > [Original Message] > From: Kenneth Waller > I was told by a local processor, several years ago, that Kodak had stopped supporting the scanning equipment needed to produce the Photo CD. Local processor was keeping it going on their own. Last time I checked, several years ago now, they were still offering Photo CD's. > > BTW, I have around 1000 images done by local processor on Photo CD and I could always improve the resulting scans somewhat by resetting white point/black point even tho the original slide exposures were spot on. > I was paying between $1.25 to $1.75 each scan. > > Kenneth Waller
RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
I was told by a local processor, several years ago, that Kodak had stopped supporting the scanning equipment needed to produce the Photo CD. Local processor was keeping it going on their own. Last time I checked, several years ago now, they were still offering Photo CD's. BTW, I have around 1000 images done by local processor on Photo CD and I could always improve the resulting scans somewhat by resetting white point/black point even tho the original slide exposures were spot on. I was paying between $1.25 to $1.75 each scan. Kenneth Waller -Original Message- From: Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended Hi Bob I did not know that you can still order Kodak CD's. That are the ones with the different high resolution scans on it, right? Here in Switzerland you can only order a low resolution JPG Picture CD which is unusable for my needs. I would love to have the Kodak CD instead of scanning. It would be some kind of additional free backup too, I just added backup hard disks yesterday. I think that Kodak charged to much royalties, so that format never got accepted and the big warehouses sadly stopped soon offering it :-( greetings Markus >> >>Markus, >> >>The sad part of these scans being too dark is that I sent them out for >>a professional scan to a Kodak CD. I paid about $1.75 each to have 50 >>slides put to a CD. I was underwhelmed by what Helix did for me here >>in Chicago. Next time I'm going elsewhere. Perhaps somebody on the >>pdml can recommend a good service. > >> PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Hi Bob I did not know that you can still order Kodak CD's. That are the ones with the different high resolution scans on it, right? Here in Switzerland you can only order a low resolution JPG Picture CD which is unusable for my needs. I would love to have the Kodak CD instead of scanning. It would be some kind of additional free backup too, I just added backup hard disks yesterday. I think that Kodak charged to much royalties, so that format never got accepted and the big warehouses sadly stopped soon offering it :-( greetings Markus >> >>Markus, >> >>The sad part of these scans being too dark is that I sent them out for >>a professional scan to a Kodak CD. I paid about $1.75 each to have 50 >>slides put to a CD. I was underwhelmed by what Helix did for me here >>in Chicago. Next time I'm going elsewhere. Perhaps somebody on the >>pdml can recommend a good service. > >>
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Markus, The sad part of these scans being too dark is that I sent them out for a professional scan to a Kodak CD. I paid about $1.75 each to have 50 slides put to a CD. I was underwhelmed by what Helix did for me here in Chicago. Next time I'm going elsewhere. Perhaps somebody on the pdml can recommend a good service. I agree that a good scanner is expensive. The cost plus the time involved in physically doing the scans have kept me from buying one. I don't want to do the post processing but have been disappointed by this last batch of slides. I spent serious time with PSP7.0 in lightening the results. The post processing idea is what is keeping me away from digital. I don't want more hours in front of a computer screen processing RAW images. I was interested in what Cotty said about shooting jpegs and just leaving it at that. But for the time being, I'm sticking to slide film. Regards, Bob S. On 5/31/05, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Bob > I like the second one :-) > > What scanner are you using for the slides and do you like it? > I just read some reviews and most of the cheaper film scanners seem to scan > too dark. > > > I'm just wondering because my scanner starts to add nasty yellow/brown lines > along the edges of the scans > and I wonder whether it's now the time to switch to a digital body. A new, > well enough scanner cost about > 50% of the Pentax DS here. > greetings > Markus > > > >>http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg > >> > >>Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from Kodachrome 64. > >>(Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and scan too dark. > >>Some repairs were in order.) > > >
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Frank and Boris, Thanks for looking and the comments. Regards, Bob S. On 5/31/05, Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > > Well Frank inspired me. > > I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to share a few. > > > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg > > and > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg > > > > Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from Kodachrome 64. > > (Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and scan too dark. > > Some repairs were in order.) > > > > Overcast day with light rain...Comments? > > Bob, I think Frank's are more sentimental while yours are more academic... > > They are good technically, but they don't inspire as much as Frank's do... > > No offense, as usual, just MHO. > > Boris > >
RE: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Hi Bob I like the second one :-) What scanner are you using for the slides and do you like it? I just read some reviews and most of the cheaper film scanners seem to scan too dark. I'm just wondering because my scanner starts to add nasty yellow/brown lines along the edges of the scans and I wonder whether it's now the time to switch to a digital body. A new, well enough scanner cost about 50% of the Pentax DS here. greetings Markus >>http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg >> >>Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from Kodachrome 64. >>(Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and scan too dark. >>Some repairs were in order.)
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
On May 31, 2005, at 9:02 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Thanks for the comments. You are on target with soft & etherial. My wife tells me the flower is a ranuncula (ra-nun-cu-la?) and you've got the colors right. Quite unusual colors on a 3-4 inch globe shaped flower bud from the Illinois Botanic Gardens in Highland Park. I think a single flower is a ranunculus - is ranuncula the plural? We grow a few of these here every year and they come in all sorts of different colours. They make great photographic subjects. Here's one of mine: http://www.bluemoon.net.nz/photo/printsdb/view.php?t=PAW&print_id=91 BTW I liked your photos (I especially like shallow DOF in macro shots) but they do look a little dark. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Hi! Well Frank inspired me. I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to share a few. http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg and http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from Kodachrome 64. (Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and scan too dark. Some repairs were in order.) Overcast day with light rain...Comments? Bob, I think Frank's are more sentimental while yours are more academic... They are good technically, but they don't inspire as much as Frank's do... No offense, as usual, just MHO. Boris
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
On 5/30/05, Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well Frank inspired me. > I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to share a few. > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg > and > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg Like 'em both, especially the second one. Those bright colours with the black background really do it for me. The first one, the colours seem a bit subdued to me, and the blossom fills the frame so much that there's not enough of that velvety black background that I liked so much in #2. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Jack, Thanks for the comments. You are on target with soft & etherial. My wife tells me the flower is a ranuncula (ra-nun-cu-la?) and you've got the colors right. Quite unusual colors on a 3-4 inch globe shaped flower bud from the Illinois Botanic Gardens in Highland Park. Regards, Bob S. On 5/30/05, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob, > My monitor renders the rose (?) a subtle but very > different and odd blend of red/orange/tan/rusty/etc... > Shallow DOF is OK with me. > Other flower seems to made up of the same general > color group with a bit of dark something added. > If you were going for soft artificial ethereal hews, > you succeeded. > Maybe you can let me know where you were going with > such 'unique' tones. > I was not offended by the images and hope you're not > offended by my remarks. > > Jack > > --- Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well Frank inspired me. > > I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to > > share a few. > > > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg > > and > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg > > > > Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from > > Kodachrome 64. > > (Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and > > scan too dark. > > Some repairs were in order.) > > > > Overcast day with light rain...Comments? > > > > Regards, Bob S. > > > > > > > > > > __ > Yahoo! Mail Mobile > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail > >
Re: PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Bob, My monitor renders the rose (?) a subtle but very different and odd blend of red/orange/tan/rusty/etc... Shallow DOF is OK with me. Other flower seems to made up of the same general color group with a bit of dark something added. If you were going for soft artificial ethereal hews, you succeeded. Maybe you can let me know where you were going with such 'unique' tones. I was not offended by the images and hope you're not offended by my remarks. Jack --- Bob Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well Frank inspired me. > I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to > share a few. > > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg > and > http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg > > Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from > Kodachrome 64. > (Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and > scan too dark. > Some repairs were in order.) > > Overcast day with light rain...Comments? > > Regards, Bob S. > > __ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
PESO: Flowers - don't look if offended
Well Frank inspired me. I've had a number of slides scanned and thought to share a few. http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Ranuncula1.jpg and http://members.aol.com/rfsindg/Tulip3.jpg Both with the MZ-S, A200/4 Macro, and scanned from Kodachrome 64. (Generally, the slides are coming back too dark and scan too dark. Some repairs were in order.) Overcast day with light rain...Comments? Regards, Bob S.
