Jonathan,
The scheduled release for the SS120 is mid Janurary. The actual release
should be 1/15 through 2/15 depending on how fast we can tie up all the
loose ends. The MSRP will be $3995 with an expected street price of around
$3500. I am sure they will be on allocation initially so the initial
I've been lurking with interest the discussion of
aliasing, sampling and related topics. Anyone
interested in squeezing the most from digital
imaging needs to grapple these details.
I don't disagree much with anyone's analysis,
although it takes a bit of reinterpretation to fit
the language to m
Austin wrote:
>>My point was - I wonder whether digital interpolation would be useful
in
>>a scanner design to smooth the output?
> Every scanner I know does offer interpolation as how they do their
> higher than native output... Why would you want to smooth the
> output? If you wanted to do tha
Collin wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, David wrote:
>> but windows only saves numbers randomly
>> or in blocks of tens, twenties and so on.
>I don't understand what your comment about windows means, since you
>control what the file names are, right?
I think David just meant that the order of filenam
Anyone know the availability and pricing of the sprintscan 120?
It looks like a great scanner. I'm wondering if I should wait for it.
Thanks,
-Jonathan
David wrote:
> Numbering them 1 to 36 in order, but windows only saves
> numbers randomly or in blocks of tens, twenties and so on.
Unless I'm misreading the problem, you need to use leading zeroes. Windows
orders filenames by ASCII character order, so "1" and "13" are considered
closer together
I've been lurking with interest the discussion of
aliasing, sampling and related topics. Anyone
interested in squeezing the most from digital
imaging needs to grapple these details.
I don't disagree much with anyone's analysis,
although it takes a bit of reinterpretation to fit
the language to m
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, David wrote:
> When I save to disc, scans from my filmscanner, I want to be able to save in
> the same order as the original slides were processed.
> Numbering them 1 to 36 in order, but windows only saves numbers randomly or
> in blocks of tens, twenties and so on.
Are you
>Austin wrote:
>> CD player do NOT oversample. The input data is at 44.1kHz.
>> What they do is interpolate the data at typically 8x the
>> input frequency. That is NOT oversampling, it is
>> interpolating. What that does is minimize the
>> requirements on the analog output filter design.
>I k
Mike wrote:
> Well, not really. The oversampling business in CD players is mostly
> a method to save as much as maybe a dime in their production costs to
> reduce the cost of the analog output reconstruction filter.
Regardless of why they use a particular technique, the fact is that a filter
*is
Austin wrote:
> CD player do NOT oversample. The input data is at 44.1kHz.
> What they do is interpolate the data at typically 8x the
> input frequency. That is NOT oversampling, it is
> interpolating. What that does is minimize the
> requirements on the analog output filter design.
I know it
> However, the film holder doesn't seem to handle film curl very well (I'm
> finding this a much bigger problem with 6cm negatives than it is with the
> 35mm that I'm more familiar with). I had better luck just laying the
> negative on the glass. Is there a technique to this that I don't know
>
Save them as 2 digit numbers. 01, 02 03, etc
>When I save to disc, scans from my filmscanner, I want to be able to save in
>the same order as the original slides were processed.
> Numbering them 1 to 36 in order, but windows only saves numbers randomly or
>in blocks of tens, twenties and s
> > - you input a blurry image which avoids the Nyquist limit, but pixel values will
still
> > be aliased, still be different to the original image. You've just done the
integration
> > of colour and luminance components in a different place.
>
> Not true. The aliasing has been eliminated. Th
Hi,
When I save to disc, scans from my filmscanner, I want to be able to save in
the same order as the original slides were processed.
Numbering them 1 to 36 in order, but windows only saves numbers randomly or
in blocks of tens, twenties and so on.
Can anyone help me so that my new digital arc
Excellent summary info, thanks very much.
I still think the attenuation of visible & UV through the
top reflective layer will be enormous, so as to render it
insignificant relative to the other side.
In summer '99, for the total eclipse, I experimented with
viewing the sun through CDs, and found
Frank,
I've been getting interested in printing black and white images using the
Piezography system (another list), and have recently been in touch with a
contributor to that discussion group. This week, I received two of my
prints enlarged to 13 x 17 printed by him. The source was scans done o
It's basic sampling theory that I was taught in the early
70's and still holds today.
As an aside, this reminds me of the caption of a cartoon:
"It was a long time ago, but at the time it seemed like the
present."
Bill Ross
> The oversampling business in CD players is mostly a method
> to save as much as maybe a dime in their production costs to reduce the >
> cost of the analog output reconstruction filter.
Not quite. There is no oversampling in a CD player, it is interpolation.
And it's not primarily money, i
CD player do NOT oversample. The input data is at 44.1kHz. What they do
is interpolate the data at typically 8x the input frequency. That is NOT
oversampling, it is interpolating. What that does is minimize the
requirements on the analog output filter design.
--
> I couldn't
> hel
Rob Geraghty wrote:
>
> Mike wrote:
> >Exactly why one might use an anti-aliasing filter ahead of the CCD which
> >I and others have mentioned (and which one person called "cheating" which
> >it is, in the sense of the winner of a race "cheated" by running faster).
>
> When I was reading somethi
Jim,
Thanks for the reply. If you've got a "Swedish Brownie" then I guess I've
got a "Japanese Brownie" - a Mamiya 645 1000s that I bought on eBay and use
mostly for astrophotography. I've found that it's really hard to tell if an
astrophoto negative is any good just using a loup. And, even if
Tony Sleep wrote:
>
> > Exactly why one might use an anti-aliasing filter ahead of the CCD which
> > I and others have mentioned (and which one person called "cheating" which
> > it is, in the sense of the winner of a race "cheated" by running faster).
>
> It doesn't buy you any more information
Tony Sleep wrote:
>
> > Remember, aliasing is when two or more different input signals appear identical
> > at the output of a sampled system. This only happens when the input signal
> > exceeds
> > the Nyquist limit of the sampled system.
>
> I've just twigged that you and others are only thi
I promised I would send some more info on the consumer test that I had read.
Please read the previous mails in this thread to place the information in
context to avoid repeating info and unneccessary mail.
In fact, don't even read it ;-), it is just here so that I keep my word.
3 types of burners
> > My god!
> >
> >
> > *** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
> >
> > On 05/12/00 at 12:54 Shough, Dean wrote:
> >
> > >Alaising .
> > .
> > >(sin(x)/x)^2 with the first zero occurring at the pixel separation.
>
> Quite!. Let's all just try and get out more :-)
>
Sorry. I will (
> > Alaising and filtering are two completely different animals. (Sounds of
> > someone ducking underneath his desk)
>
> Regrettably not, as you seem to have missed that the CCD itself produces
> aliased pixel
> values as a result of this filtering. You are looking at things only in
> the fre
I just released VueScan 6.3.17 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux.
It can be downloaded from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
What's new in version 6.3.17
* Added support for AGFA SnapScan and Acer scanners
* Fixed problem with UMAX 1200S
* Fixed Macintosh problems with some scanners
(
> Remember, aliasing is when two or more different input signals appear identical
> at the output of a sampled system. This only happens when the input signal
> exceeds
> the Nyquist limit of the sampled system.
I've just twigged that you and others are only thinking in the frequency domain,
w
> Exactly why one might use an anti-aliasing filter ahead of the CCD which
> I and others have mentioned (and which one person called "cheating" which
> it is, in the sense of the winner of a race "cheated" by running faster).
It doesn't buy you any more information in your scan, all it does is a
> My god!
>
>
> *** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
>
> On 05/12/00 at 12:54 Shough, Dean wrote:
>
> >Alaising .
> .
> >(sin(x)/x)^2 with the first zero occurring at the pixel separation.
Quite!. Let's all just try and get out more :-)
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.c
> Alaising and filtering are two completely different animals. (Sounds of
> someone ducking underneath his desk)
Regrettably not, as you seem to have missed that the CCD itself produces aliased pixel
values as a result of this filtering. You are looking at things only in the frequency
domain
Dean Shough wrote:
> Mathematically, for a linear-shift invariant system,
> the image seen by the CCD is:
> image ** pixel ** sampler
> where '**' is a two dimensional convolution, 'image'
> is the image at the CCD, 'pixel' is the response of a
> single pixel due to its size and shape, and
I agree. I do find the information fascinating. How do I apply it?
Dave Dillon
-Original Message-
From: Bond, Alistair [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 06 December 2000 11:02
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: filmscanners: RE: Film Scanners and what they see.
>>Dean Shough wrote:
>
34 matches
Mail list logo
