Anyone use Vuescan with the Artixscan 4000T? I find that I get excellent
results using the Scan Wizard software and Fuji Sensia 100, Kodak 100 SW and
Kodachrome 64. I tried Silver Fast but a) think the interface is foul and b)
get inferior results. I also have Vuescan. For negatives the results ar
I guess it depended on which country you were in at the time. He was
represented by Magnum in the US in the 1970's. It's also possible that
Magnum had a set of copy negatives but It's not worth further discussion .
Larry
At 09:46 PM 11/6/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Cartier-Bresson's prints were m
> I'm having problems with Vuescan scanning very large scans, and getting
> memory warnings, like:
>
> Warning:
> Unable to allocate 638Mb memory
> Try increasing the amount of virtual memory
VueScan is giving out a warning?!? One thing I noticed about Vuescan is that
it does not give out any er
Cartier-Bresson's prints were made by George Fevre, who also printed for
Doisneau, Brassai and others. He was the printer at a big lab in
Paris. This is well-documented, but I thought it was somewhat off-topic
for the list. There are many articles about it and interviews with Fevrre.
At 08:
My apologies for clogging bandwidth with a message that doesn't really add any useful
information ;-), but I would like to add:
1. Way to go, Dave! There's at least 2 of us who think like that on the list, so I'll
happily duck for cover too :). I think we all need to spend a bit more time
ex
- Original Message -
From: "Jeff Spirer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 4:40 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: 2700ppi a limiting factor in sharpness?
> >But Bresson was more on intuition
> >than engineering, and I don't think he made his photo
> I love making 24x36" prints on an Epson 7000 from 800 speed color negs
> shot with a $90 point and shoot. Why? Because they look great.
I doubt they *really* look "great".
> I also own and shoot regularily with the best glass available for
> 35mm, 6x7, and 4x5, and I'm here to tell you reso
Dave wrote:
>I love making 24x36" prints on an Epson 7000 from 800 speed color negs
>shot with a $90 point and shoot. Why? Because they look great.
What are you scanning the 800 speed film with, Dave?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
All this talk about great lenses that are needed to make great photos reminds me that,
finally, it is the
vision of the photographer that really counts.
One need look no further than the amazing photos that Edward Steichen took at the
Acropolis in Greece in the
1920s (?) using a box camera he b
Cartier-Bresson's prints were made by in the darkroom at Magnum. When I was
in collage I had a friend that worked there. He could call down to the
darkroom at any time and ask for a print (not that he did it that often
because they had to be accounted for. He did have a print of one of the
mos
> Roger wrote:
>
> > The best 35 mm lens will have trouble making a really good 11x14.
> > The print size limit for 35 mm lenses is therefore somewhere
> > in that range, i.e., at least 8x10 but not much over 11x14.
You should tell that to National Geographic...They regularly do 8x10 *foot* prin
At 06:21 PM 11/6/01, Dave King wrote:
>Oh I don't know, Cartier Bresson's large format prints from 40 year
>old negs look pretty good to me. But Bresson was more on intuition
>than engineering, and I don't think he made his photos or prints for
>photo geeks who look at a print from 2 inches away
Roger wrote:
> It sounds like you want to know how much money you
> should spend on lenses (and maybe what brand) in
> order to get decent scans.
Better scans, yes. The scans I get now are "decent" enough for me, but
they could be better. All these terms are relative. :)
> The best 35mm lens w
Thanks, Rob. I understand a little better about what you were asking about. It
sounds like you want to know how much money you should spend on lenses (and maybe what
brand) in order to get decent scans.
My suggestion would be buy "reasonably costly" lenses, fixed focal length rather than
zoom
Eric wrote:
>Nikon LS IV 2900DPI with Digital ICE, ROC and Gem software approx $750.00
>http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/CSIV/C4A.HTM
>Nikon Supercoolscan 2000 2700 DPI with ICE, ROC and GEM software multipass
>scanning approx. $750.00
>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/LS2K/LS2KA.HTM
>
Roger wrote:
> Lens quality problems are not scanning issues. They're
> photographic issues.
Well, yes, but how many non-pro photographers look at their films with the
sort of equivalent magnification you get at 2700dpi? There's plenty of
people who can afford a film scanner who might not check
Rob,
You might want to look at the Voigtlander (Cosina) range of lenses. Although these
are primarily LTM manual focus rangefinder lenses, they have produced some models
(I think the 75mm and 90mm) in SLR mounts as well.
By all accounts, these lenses may not be quite up there with Leica/Conta
In a message dated 11/6/2001 2:41:36 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> In FilmGet v1.0.1
> 1. In menu Settings -> Exposure Settings...
> 2. switch off Auto Exposure
> 3. Now you can adjust Exposure from -2stops up to +2stops.
> By the way I do not how to control exposure in Vuescan, expos
> At the risk of stating the obvious, to reach the limits of your lens
> resolving power you must either select a fast shutter speed or
> use a tripod,
Or be very good at holding the camera very steady...
> otherwise the image will be somewhat soft due to camera shake. Even then
> problems can
Sorry, I do mean to be snide, but like duh. Does anyone really not already
know this, or am I missing your point?
Sometimes I WANT to shoot with my Zeiss Super Ikonta B at 2.8...and it gives
me fuzzy negatives, compared to my Hasselblad...but I still want so scan
them!
> Lens quality problems
Kim,
Polaroid has not officially tested XP but I do know someone that tried it
and it worked. To quote:
" I did one very fast test on the beta 1 version of XP (home, I think). I
hooked up a scanner (either a 4000 or 4000P, I don't remember). The scanner
was identified and I was able to do a scan."
In FilmGet v1.0.1
1. In menu Settings -> Exposure Settings...
2. switch off Auto Exposure
3. Now you can adjust Exposure from -2stops up to +2stops.
By the way I do not how to control exposure in Vuescan, exposure 6 does not
allow obtain same results as +2stops in filmGet.
Regards
Tom
--- D
Lens quality problems are not scanning issues. They're photographic issues. Before
scanning, you should have a negative or transparency that is sharp. If it isn't,
scanning won't improve anything. It's possible that a 2700 dpi scanner can camouflage
some lens defects, but a 4000 dpi scanner
At the risk of stating the obvious, to reach the limits of your lens
resolving power you must either select a fast shutter speed or use a tripod,
otherwise the image will be somewhat soft due to camera shake. Even then
problems can arise from mirror slap and shutter vibration when the exposure
is
At 8:57 PM +1000 11/6/01, Rob Geraghty wrote:
>I don't know if it's terribly useful with a 2710. Any other 2710 owners use
>multipass? I don't use it much with my LS30, but when I have tried it the
>registration has been OK. It seems to cause a slight loss of sharpness, but
>also seems to reduc
http://www.lasersoft-imaging.com/silverfast/upgrade-polaroid55-en.htm
It's kinda of hidden on SilverFast's site but the above is the
directions for how to get the discount Negafix Upgrade Price for
Polaroid Scanners.
Shawn Coggins http://www.originalgimp.org/index.htm
http://www.herronparkhors
> Obscanning: Has anyone else noticed the difference in sharpness between
> their lenses when scanning films?
Drastic difference, yes!
I know about conflicting answers ...
currently I have Photosmart that seems to work ok, but not good on sunset
and a bit dark images.. subject in the slides
So I have a question for you to ponder.
I am looking for a new scanner and have narrowed it down to three options.
they are .
Nikon LS
That would be great Tom. I had this scanner for a few months now but
haven't really used the filmget software too much.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, tom wrote:
> In device control there is an option Exposure, I do not have the scanner here,
> so I can send you more precise answer in the evening.
> Tom
At 3:14 PM +1000 11/6/01, Rob Geraghty wrote:
>Obscanning: Has anyone else noticed the difference in sharpness between
>their lenses when scanning films?
Yes, I've found that a few of my lenses are not as sharp at
the edges as I thought they were, in particular my Pentax 35-105
f/3.5 zo
Hi all,
I'm having problems with Vuescan scanning very large scans, and getting
memory warnings, like:
Warning:
Unable to allocate 638Mb memory
Try increasing the amount of virtual memory
I have tried everything in terms of increasing the Virtual Memory/Paging
file size, and it seems to make no
I just released VueScan 7.2.3 for Windows, Mac OS 8/9/X
and Linux. It can be downloaded from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
What's new in version 7.2.3
* Significantly improved quality of "Filter|Grain reduction"
* Added support for more scan resolutions on some scanners
* Fixed pr
I am sorry if I was misleading in my comment, but I was looking at 12 to 15 months into
the future in light of Polaroids Chapter 11 filing. I have great respect for David
Hemingway (and Polaroid), but I doubt if he can say for sure if Polaroid will be in a
position to repair/replace a defective sc
>>If people aren't stuck on having a full zoom range, in general, fixed
>>focus lenses are better quality and better value. Also, used lenses can
>>often be good value, if they come with some type of warranty.
>>
>
It has been brought to my attention that I "mis-typed" in my posting
regar
Well, if you click on it and it doesn't explain itself, it obviously
doesn't work! ;-)
Art
Ken Durling wrote:
> I'm going to read Wayne Fulton ro get clear on the difference between
> "sharpen" and "unsharp mask," but PSP 7 has an adjsutment called
> "Clarify" which looks sort of like a combin
"Ken Durling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Someone feel like expounding briefly on the multiple pass technique?
It just means the scanner does several passes and combines the result.
> I'm using Vuescan and a FS2710, slides and both color and B&W negs.
> What is the purpose and what determines t
> Someone feel like expounding briefly on the multiple pass technique?
> I'm using Vuescan and a FS2710, slides and both color and B&W negs.
> What is the purpose and what determines the number of passes you set?
> I tried a couple at 2 passes, and saw no noticeable effect, although
> I'm not at a
In device control there is an option Exposure, I do not have the scanner here,
so I can send you more precise answer in the evening.
Tom
--- David Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> How do you put a +2 in filmget or getfilm??
>
__
Do You Yah
> But it also looks like the extra exposure has blown the highlights pretty
> badly
Please remember that the presented images are all after gamma correction. I
corrected gamma in order to "amplify" noises in very dark area (dark area in
underexposed (-2) slide). It was adjusted more than necessary
> I'm going to read Wayne Fulton ro get clear on the difference between
> "sharpen" and "unsharp mask," but PSP 7 has an adjsutment called
> "Clarify" which looks sort of like a combination of contrast and
> sharpness adjustment. Anyone know exactly what it does?
Clarify was discussed at the alt
Anyone having after sales warranty problems with Polaroid equipment should
contact David Hemingway. I know of NOT one and I've been on this list most
of the time for the last 20 months. If you've been following the the list,
you must know that no other scanner manufactures has a presence here. I
Hi Eric;
You're going to get conflicting answers from different folks on this list. I
have the SS4000 and love it and I wouldn't consider the other two for my
purposes. If you think you may want to crop your images and you want to be
able to make the largest prints you can out of the resulting fil
42 matches
Mail list logo
