photoscientia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Their fix was ingenious. More a stroke of inspiration than a logical
engineering solution.
They fire a reverse pulse of very short duration into the motor at the end
of every step.
This acts as electronic damping, and it's very controllable.
Maybe Ed
ILyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, you need a Mac, which doesn't suffer the problem, even if CMS in On.
Or
you need for Nikon to use the same scsi timing as the Mac and then the PC
wouldn't suffer the problem when CMS is turned ON.
[snip]
The problem has Sweet FA to do with resonance, if it
Roman Kielich® [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
64K blocks that are causing the resonance that results in jaggies. My
guess
in your case was that switching on colour mangement increased the
computer's
CPU overhead to the point that the actual scanning process was slowed
down.
if it is CPU problem,
Adjusting levels or curves does not lose data. What you are doing is
re-mapping the data. When you decimate (reduce in size) you lose
data, but
changing a value of 187 to 192 does not lose data.
The 'loss' occurs in rounding errors. Eg 187 becomes 192.4567, which gets
rounded to 192 in
Personally I don't really care whether it's resonance, timing, or
anything
else - but I *do* know that the commands Vuescan sends to the scanner
resolve the problem.
From what Ed has said previously, NS reads data in 64k chunks, and he
modified later versions of Vuescan to instead read one
Rob,
I'm in Bucks, UK and have an LS30. If Pete wants to mail me off list, we
may be able to arrange this.
Regards
Bob Armstrong
On Saturday, October 28, 2000 Rob wrote:
photoscientia wrote:
Any chance the same slide could be scanned on an LS30 and/or a SS400?
I don't have access ..to
Any reviews on the Kodak RFS3600 film scanner?
thanks,
Ron
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE
Ian, I can see you're upset about this, but I think you're letting your
anger get in the way of logical analysis.
I'm not in the least upset with the "problem". I don't have it anymore :-)
Users of Ed's more recent version of VueScan don't have it any more because
he uses the same buffer size
Hello list,
Greetings again. After absence from March I decided to re-join and I'm happy
to let you know that reason for that is an FS2710 I recently acquired . I
downloaded latest Vuescan and have immediately put it to my common test:
it's an underexposed (-1EV, someone forgot to push the roll)
WALTER writes ...
The SprintScan 4000 allows me to select "raw color positive" (or
negative)
and scan at 4000 dpi. I can save that scan as a TIFF file at 12 bit
with no
gamma or other correction, or, I can make gamma corrections in the
scanner
software and save the file at 8 bit. Is it
ILyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of say 1000Mhz. Sorry, but the CPU overhead theory dies a death as soon as
someone with a 200 Pentium using ICE says they don't have the problem and
someone with the faster CPU does.
That depends on what else might be occupying the CPU - as in my case, the
IDE
Bob Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in Bucks, UK and have an LS30. If Pete wants to mail me off list, we
may be able to arrange this.
Excellent, Bob!
I think you'd need to email Pete with your snail address. If possible, I'd
like a raw scan of a section which shows the finest
Salinger Igor writes ...
...
I have to admit that I got used to levels sliders and histograms in
PShop and
I really miss such both in VueScan and Canon software. So my basic
questions
are (Ed, anyone else?): any chance that such things will be
available at
future VueScans and other is
UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are
praises for doing so. I also recall that he spent some time explaining the
nature of the fix he applied.
Um, so you're agreeing with me here in this respect?
Nope, I'm saying that Ed apparently fixed the problem on the PC by
effectively adjusting the timing for the data, nothing more.
Ian
I seem to remember somewhere, on this or another list, that there was an
increase of the Dmax from 3.4 to 3.? when using the multi-scanning
capability with the Silverfast software package available with the SS4000.
It would seem to me that one could average out noise this way, but not
increase
Is it better practice to save it
uncorrected at the higher bit depth and make all changes in PS or to
make the gammma corrections in the scanner software and save as an 8 bit
file?
It depends on which you prefer. Both methods should give you equivalent
results, since you are applying
_
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Walt,
When you select 12 bit "raw" scan you may also find it useful to check the
box below to embed the scaer profile. This embeds the profile for the
scanner and gets saves a lot of work you would have to do without it.
David
-Original Message-
From: WALTER MESS [mailto:[EMAIL
the pass-after-pass registration not being perfect.
I have found that to be true on my SS4k...but not only is the overall image
registration off, the line to line registration is off just enough to make
it virtually unusable. It works great for a single pass though...
The Leafscan 45 does
20 matches
Mail list logo
