Frank writes ...
> That sounds more like the limitations of a mapping algorithm than
any
> limitations that we might find in nature.
>
I suppose you could put that way. Rather, I imagine the RGB data
model ... a cube with black and white at opposite apexes, and "data
pure" red, green, blue,
How about pre-fogging trans. film? Does anybody really do that to
reduce contrast?
Jon
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
The experience I've had with Provia 100F in the U.S. Pacific Northwest,
where it is overcast 9 months out of the year, is that it is actually best
when overcast. If I take pictures of a forested scene that is hundreds of
feet away (e.g. a waterfalls with surrounding moss-covered cliffs) with a
blu
"Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> suspect, kodak may have done similar. let me know teh results of your
> experiment before February (I am heading to Coffs in two weeks).
On a related topic, here's two jpegs I scanned off the roll of Provia 400F.
The photo was scanned at 2700dpi using
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 01:17:25 -0800 (PST) tom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I am just wondering which of the new scanners (IV or 4000) is a best buy (hobby
> purpose).
> Of course 4000 is superior but the specification of IV seems to be better than
> LS2000 which is a decent scanner.
> I am intere
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:20:28 +1100 Roman =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kielich=AE?=
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> ?? speed? When I started photography, 15-18 DIN (25-50 ASA) films were
> standard, and DIN 27/ASA 400 were terribly high speed! BTW, it was in
> continental Europe (same problem with seasons and
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 11:12:34 - Michael Wilkinson
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Despite protestations from others on the list concerning only processing
> at industry standards
> it is easy to reduce contrast on tranny film.
> You do need to experiment but basically you need to overexpose an
On 17 Jan 2001 07:47:16 -0800 Frank Paris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> And on my monitor, it DOES produce a real color, because I can SEE it.
> It's a bright blue. So I don't know what you mean in saying it is not a real
> color.
I think he meant that it's completely device dependent what colo
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:26:55 -0800 Bob Shomler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> Yes, according to Nikon product data sheets: The 4000 has "7 elements in 4 groups
including 3 ED
> glass elements" and the 8000 "14 elements in 6 groups including 6 ED glass
elements."
So the latter is varifocal
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:29:01 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> Except as an index print which it sounds like you were talking
> about. :)
Well yes and no. They used to do index prints which were about half the neg size, but
these are proper contact sheet size and include the
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 13:37:46 +0100 Oostrom, Jerry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> What I have done however, until recently, is make a lot of high-bit scans of
> color negative film, let vuescan code them in ProPhotoRGB, do my color
> adjustments and convert to 8-bit files for archiving. My prioriti
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 10:37:58 +0100 Oostrom, Jerry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Now I just have to see if I can also see the limitations of gamut, of which
> you say they are much more apparent than granularity differences between
> color spaces used in 24/48 bit files. I have already seen some s
>i do not want to spend too much money and need recogmendations.
How much are you willing to spend and what level of quality will you settle
for? Good 20" monitors that have high quality outputs are not cheap
compared to the consumer quality 19" than have been showing up. I just
bought a Hitach
That sounds more like the limitations of a mapping algorithm than any
limitations that we might find in nature.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of shAf
> Se
Yes they do. Like many things Kodak has attempted, their effort to finish
off Kodachrome was not a success. So they can use all the help they can get
from whom ever will give it. :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: We
Hi Tom
It depends on how serious you want to scan your film. For me, Coolscan III is good for
me, and of course it's update verion, i.e. IV, should suit my needs.
But if you look for serious stuff, u may go for 4000.
Simon
tom wrote:
> Hi,
> I am just wondering which of the new scanners (IV
Frank writes ...
> I guess now the question is, what do you mean by "nature"?
Say you have a perfect camera, perfect film, and a
perfect scanner ... and your image of a "natural" subject
ends up in Photoshop. You will never see the pixel
value 0-0-255 ... and in fact, there are a number
This might be the URL:
http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.lyons/
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Geraghty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 10:32 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: How to set Epson driver to NO color correction
for profiling?
|
Tomasz,
I am at the same decision point as you are. I am holding out for the
LS-4000ED. Maybe in two to five years digital backs will be at a quality
and price point I can afford. Meanwhile, I'll be working on a giant
backload of slides.
John
At 01:17 AM 1/17/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi,
>I am
Exactly. I don't get his point either.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Weise
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 1:53 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
chuck phelps wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:14:09 + Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > digital photography is too young for any real standard, you want a
> > film
> > > designed for scanning?
> >
> > I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
>
I guess now the question is, what do you mean by "nature"?
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of shAf
> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 3:48 PM
> To: [EMAI
i need to buy a 20 inch pc monitor to to be used with photoshop. i do not
want to spend too much money and need recogmendations. i want to get rob
sheppard's instructional video on photoshop. does anyone know the name and
where to get it. thanks, joanna
I agree with Roman. I think you are being a little over optimistic. While
technology is moving fast and the day will come, I do not think that time
will be in the immediate future.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of B.Rumary
Sent: Wednesday
Byron writes ...
> Canon FS2710 negatives aren't scanning properly on my
> system.They come out looking like negatives (!)
> On a Win98SE system.
>
> Anyone else having similar problems?
This happened to me only once with the previous release. At that
time, I simply restarted V
In general, how grainy are negs from the FS2710 compared with the Polaroid
and Nikon 35mm scanners?
thanks
Andy Darlow
At 03:18 PM 1/17/01 -0800, you wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 1:42 PM
>Subject: fil
Daniel writes ...
> Is "physical reality" a technical term? And aren't you
> confusing color resolution with whatever
> "physical reality" is? If I grant that the
> phosphor response of monitors is flat between 0,0,240 and
> 0,0,255, how does this impinge on whether
> that color "real?" You a
Roman,
> you will get your scanner dedicated film as soon as there is market for it.
> there still may be a few years before we see something like that.
>
I doubt that you will get it - by then digital cameras will be so good that
there would be no market for such film!
Brian Rumary, England
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 1:42 PM
Subject: filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.11 Available
> What's new in version 6.4.11
>
> * Improved quality of negative scans on FS2710
Canon FS2710 negatives aren't scanning p
Is "physical reality" a technical term? And aren't you confusing color
resolution with whatever "physical reality" is? If I grant that the
phosphor response of monitors is flat between 0,0,240 and 0,0,255, how does
this impinge on whether that color "real?" You are conflating two issues,
so I c
I just released VueScan 6.4.11 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux.
It can be downloaded from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
What's new in version 6.4.11
* Fixed some Mac OS problems by increasing default
memory size for VueScan by 10 MBytes (to 85 MBytes)
* Added support for ejecting fi
I've received two APS scans from the FS2710, and will release
VueScan 6.4.10 with this data (and some more fixes) today or
tomorrow.
Thanks,
Ed Hamrick
Hi Ed,
I have the scanner and the adapter, but I never used it as I had no need
Can do the test overnight, no problem (if it is OK without film) hope the
fact I have Vuescan trial version few months old would not make the
difference. Can I convert TIFF to JPEG for easier transfer?
Greetings
Frank writes ...
> Relative to a monitor, 0,0,255 in itself is not a specific
> color, real or not.
> It depends on what the phosphors do when you feed it
> those values, ...
That goes without saying ...
> And on my monitor, it DOES produce a real color,
> because I can SEE it.
> ...
Could someone with a Canon FS2710 and an APS
adapter do a test for me?
I'd like to add a mode to VueScan for scanning APS with
this scanner, and to do this I need to get the positions of
the APS window in the scanning window.
A simple test that will do this is:
1) Run VueScan
2) Turn on "Files|
>> I noticed that its lens is 14 elements in the 8000, which seems an awful lot
>> of glass... now maybe this is great and wonderful
>
>The Nikon 4000 has 7 elements in 4 groups; is the 8000 really different?
Yes, according to Nikon product data sheets: The 4000 has "7 elements in 4 groups
incl
In reading my response, I should further clarify: There are some other (more subtle)
differences between 1394-1995 and 1394a, but they lie within the details of the
protocol and are largely transparent to the end user.
Specifically, 1394a offers improved data traffic control (allowing for high
Relative to a monitor, 0,0,255 in itself is not a specific color, real or
not. It depends on what the phosphors do when you feed it those values, and
will be different depending on the monitor and how it is calibrated (or
not). And on my monitor, it DOES produce a real color, because I can SEE it.
Roman,
I am reading this and laughing; but not at you. I am laughing because for
the life of me I cannot figure out what we are really arguing about in that
we are in agreement on most of the points. I agree that currently digital
photography at its present stage of development leaves much to be
ALLM Rose wrote:
>
> I would really appreciate some help. I am trying to profile my Epson
> 2000P printer using Monaco EZcolor 1.6. To do this I must print a
> (Monaco-supplied) profiling image on the 2000P, tape a
> (Monaco-supplied) target just below the printed image, and scan the
> whole
Jerry writes ...
> ...
> What I have done however, until recently, is make a lot of
> high-bit scans of color negative film, let vuescan
> code them in ProPhotoRGB, do my color
> adjustments and convert to 8-bit files for archiving. My
> priorities were: 1 archiving, 2 monitor viewing,
> 3 web us
> Rafe thanks - I do this sort of thing regularly (shows I am not good at
> taking flat, well-lit shots!). The problem I was discussing arises when
> you get blooming from one scanner exposure to another - then it becomes
> difficult if not impossible to combine them satisfactorily using these
> > Some CCDs feature anti-blooming so that this does not happen.
>
> I think all current generation CCD's try to do this, but there's still a
> point at
> which charge leaks between pixels.
>
>
This may be true for linear CCDs, but it is definitely not standard for
scientific CCDs. When I l
I stand corrected again, thanks for the additional correction. I am
beginning to feel like a servo mechanism which bounces from one correction
to the next. But I guess I am learning new things from it. :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Yes, IEEE 1394a is backwards compliant with IEEE 1394-1995, which is the original 1394
specification devices up to this point have been designed to.
The primary difference between the two is that 1394a provides greater bus speeds and
cable length, although a 1394a compliant computer will not be
At 22:34 16/01/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>"Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One Nikon LS30 buys at least 2 Nikon cameras.
>
>I think you mean one LS2000 buys 2 Nikon cameras,
>unless Nikon SLRs just got a lot cheaper than last I checked. ;)
>
>Rob
LS30 was AUD1640, you can have Nikon
I have a question as result of the 'Color Profiles for Scanners' thread.
>From that thread I got the feeling that it isn't the best approach to have a
low (8-bit) image file with a large gamut space. You use a small part of the
possible 256^3 values in which a pixel can be RGB-coded, which is eit
At 12:26 AM 1/17/01 -0600, you wrote:
>While you may very well be right about the only difference being in the
>addition of new film emulsion hardeners to prevent scratching, Kodak claims
>to have done more than this to the film so as to make it more appropriate
>for scanning.
I believe I've als
If you are using QP to print your images than I suggest you
read:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=739167
Do you not have a "No Color Correction" setting in the 2000P
driver?
Print the Target via QP and not EZcolor.
Dale
- Original Message -
one lens or two?
At 01:21 17/01/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Been reading dissection of the new Nikon's 4000/8000 press claims with
>interest... but can I ask about its optics?
>I noticed that its lens is 14 elements in the 8000, which seems an awful lot
>of glass... now maybe this is great and wonder
Tony,
Despite protestations from others on the list concerning only processing
at industry standards
it is easy to reduce contrast on tranny film.
You do need to experiment but basically you need to overexpose and
underdevelop.
For a long time we used this technique to make duplicate transparenci
At 21:38 16/01/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>Roger wrote:
>[snip]
> > So, unfortunately, you won't have a negative colour image
> > after the second (Colour) developer.
>
>Doesn't this stuff relate to cross-processing somehow? Or is it only
>possible to cross process from a neg film to E6 not the other
Use
Vuescan and do a raw scan. It worked
great with my Epson 610 USB scanner and WiziWYG.
-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Howard Griffin
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001
11:54
To: Filmscanners Mailing List
Subject: filmscanner
Laurie, digital photography in its current implementation is inferior to
AgX systems. And will be much longer. I have nothing against a special film
tuned to scanners. However, the world is dollar/yen/pound/mark driven.
Unless they can make enough profit, they will not introduce it. Technically
has anyone scanned Kodak Ektar 25? (it's an old film, at least no longer on
offer)? It had extremely small grain and very short exposure latitude,
sharp bends down and up (shadows/highlights). I managed to enlarge 135
frame to 50 by 40 cm with no visible grain and very good tonal rendition of
At 23:21 16/01/2001 +, you wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 21:19:49 +1100 Roman =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kielich=AE?=
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > does anyone know, which feature of Kodak Supra makes it scanner friendly?
>
>
>The marketing dept's engineering of the box it comes in? Don't forget,
>thi
At 23:21 16/01/2001 +, you wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 14:09:27 -0600 Henry Richardson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>wrote:
>
> > Along these same lines, would it be possible to produce a positive film
> that
> > has characteristics better suited to scanning, e.g., lower contrast and
> > maybe less
At 23:21 16/01/2001 +, you wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:14:09 + Richard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
>
>It certainly wasn't designed for photography. At least not in the UK
>between November
>and May.
>
>Regards
>
>Ton
At 08:35 16/01/2001 -0700, you wrote:
Mike,
going back to your question regarding cross processing. The only useful
case I had, was when we needed to copy architect's drawing. Plain color neg
was too soft, while e6 film in c41 gave us good contrast. colors were
distinctly different (particular
At 11:56 16/01/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>Ok, Thanks for the corrective clarification. Given this, I would concur
>that my earlier speculation on how it might be possible to cross-process E-6
>to obtain a negative without the color mask would not work. There are
>obvious differences between E-6 and
At 22:38 16/01/2001 +1000, you wrote:
>BTW speaking of supply and demand, I believe some of the latest minilabs
>are actually scanning the film to print it onto photographic paper rather
>than
>using a more traditional optical printing method. That would seem to be a
>ready-made boost to having
Thank you Tony Sleep for answering the questions.
Andrew Rodney also mailed a link to an article that itself links to another
article which confirmed my suspicions. (Thank you too, Andrew)
His link:
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/8582.html
The other linked article states IMP that a wide
I couldn't find any info on Kodak web page. there is no info on the film
design. yonks ago mf film had a matt backing to make retouching easier. I
suspect, kodak may have done similar. let me know teh results of your
experiment before February (I am heading to Coffs in two weeks).
Roman
, not
Hi,
I am going to purchase a notebook and I found in specification that it is
equipped with 1394a, is it compatible with usual 1394 (e.g. used in D1 or new
LS 4000ED) ?
Regards
Tomasz
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mai
Hi,
I am just wondering which of the new scanners (IV or 4000) is a best buy (hobby
purpose).
Of course 4000 is superior but the specification of IV seems to be better than
LS2000 which is a decent scanner.
I am interested in your opinion what is a better solution ?
- buying IV and keeping 1000US
Tony writes ...
>
> A gamut comprises a subset of colours out of infinite variety. There
are colours
> outside it which are simply unavailable and cannot appear in any
image which uses it.
> ...
Just to add ... the color gamut which is described by R,G & B
pixel values, whether it be wide gam
66 matches
Mail list logo
