Personally I prefer Nikonscan 3 to any scan driver I've used, especially for
color negatives. With Nikonscan set up correctly for color management you
may be amazed at color neg scan quality just using Nikonscan's defaults.
PhotoCal and Spyder aren't that expensive, why not do it?
Dave
-
? That should bend like a banana in the Nikon holders then!
Dave King wrote:
I heard a tantalizing rumor today that Nikon is preparing a scanner
similar
to the LS-8000 that will scan up to 4x5 at a price point similar to the
8000. Hope it's true!
Dave
with the Nikon film holders? (I'm waiting for delivery
of an LS-8000)
Åke
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dave King
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: new 4x5 Nikon scanner
Why don't you guys just get married?
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Austin,
You regularly chastise people for using inaccurate or incomplete terms.
Shall we discuss depth of FIELD versus depth of FILM as an
example, in spite of the fact that EVERYONE
.
- Original Message -
From: Dave King [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:23 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: OT: Shoot the Messenger
Hummm,
Well I ran the sfc /scannow command (thanks, that's a new one on me) and it
finished and closed with no discernable flags
: Cary Enoch R... aka Enoch's Vision, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 11:21 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: OT: Shoot the Messenger
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dave King
Haven't gone to the registry yet, but following the run
dialog route got
2K by a mile.
- Original Message -
From: JimD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm running a Polaroid SS4000 as my scanner utilize
Insight, Vuescan and PS6 in my workflow.
I'm planning to update my wintel box and need to
choose between Win2K WinXP.
Which should I choose?
Thanks,
JimD
A big advantage to the SS120 -- depth of focus!! If it doesn't have to be
perfectly flat, don't fix it if it ain't broke:)
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 5:54 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: IT8
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
because I'm using it for scanning until I can get the desktop
upgraded. Actually, scanning isn't the problem (the processor is an
Athalon 1.2 gig), but Photoshop keeps crashing when running big files.
RAM is maxed out at 512 gig
assume you mean .5GB, 512MB
You got
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes. It greatly improves the focus, but I have to blow a hurricane of
compressed air over the carrier and film to try to keep them clean, and as
you can see, I'm still getting interference. These rings don't look like
dust, though--more like a slight
In 16 bit run a curves correction for the shadows as desired, ignoring the
rest of the image. Use history brush to paint this curve state into the
shadows of the previous state using a medium fuzzy brush at 100%.
Dave
-
From: Anthony Atkielski
I said previously:
A CCD scanner will not read the deepest shadows of transparency film
Well, I may have to eat my words here. I've spent the evening testing the
LS-8000 using some of the chromes that have given me fits in the past. One
slide in particular that I had to use the two scans and
I agree with your current observations except I find Insight to reproduce
any color transparency I have tried pretty well. Also, the 35mm strip
holder has sprocket hole tabs movable by the film position slider,
enabling the film to be positioned side to side with little effort. After
closing
It appears to me so far that it also doesn't run in original Win98 (not SE).
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Alex Zabrovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 6:39 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Re:GRAIN/ICE SHOWDOWN: Nikon
LS8000vs.MinoltaScanMulti
I wonder if anyone else has dealt with this: the included firewire card did
not include drivers. There's a driver updater on the Nikonscan 3 install
CD, but only for Win 98 SE, and I'm still running 98 orig ver. I found a
Firewarden driver online at http://www.ratocsystems.com/english/ but it
Yep, easy as pie.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 12:28 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: SS 120 questions for current users
Dave
Do you use the SS 120 with Vuescan. Is it just a case of plug it in and
and the
histogram ended sharply at the black end as it everything had been pushed
against a wall.
I think I need more practice with the SS120 but it is difficult at the
dealer. I think I will ask if I can rent it out for a weekend.
Thanks for your reply.
Simon
On 11/4/02 8:03 pm, Dave King [EMAIL
The current 4000 dpi Polaroid scanners (in my opinion) are about as good as
CCD scanners get. I scan Kodachromes frequently with my (elderly) SS4000
and get all the shadow detail I see on the light table, with very little
noise. A drum scan may be a bit more open at the bottom, but the Polaroid
Upon installation it gives you options to add driver components as needed
for SS4000, SS4000+, SS120, and SS45 Ultra. The upgrade is worth having
(it's really good with transparencies especially), and the final version
fixes a bug with right click context sensitive menus.
Dave
From: [EMAIL
of the Flextight, SS120, MDSMP or Nikon
8000.
I have seen the review of the MDSMP where a scan showed a lot of noise in a
particularly dark part of the scan. 16x multisampling erradicated most of
it although there was visible banding.
Simon
Dave King wrote:
I didn't say edge to edge sharpness
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I accept that the software can assist in pulling more information out of
a
negative
Simon
Boy, do I disagree with that... How on earth can software pull more
information out of a negative, aside from the control of the light source
and the analog gain
Preben wrote:
---
I have been very happy with Polaroid's SS4000 - scanned 11.000 slides so
far - but there are, fairly frequently, moments where a polarized, dark blue
sky on a Velvia comes out a mess - and I wish for an Imacon, somehow hoping
that it could solve the problem. I tried
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 8:35 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Hi Dave,
Calibration settings is the wrong term. What I meant is the software
interface leads one
the time and will
try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.
Simon
Dave King wrpte:
When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in all
the parameters you mention except detail resolution. I don't know how
much
the price of the Flextight has fallen
comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.
Simon
Dave King wrpte:
When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in
all
the parameters you mention except detail resolution. I don't know how
much
the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other
scanners
First advice is go to a better lab:) That's not a normal result.
If you can tape the film edges in the carrier that's one way. Otherwise
about all you can do that doesn't risk damage is to flatten with weight and
wait, or get a glass carrier.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Edward P.
Don't all CEO's do that these days:(
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 2:15 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: cdrw drives
Funny you should mention Smart Friendly. They are out of business, seems
their
I'd like to know the answer to this too.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a new version of Insight that will work with the former SS4000?
Is it out of Beta yet? I have tried to look for Insight updates on the
Polaroid site, but I seem to lack the roadmap for
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Kent
I concur... Definitely do not skimp on the scanner. While a
high end scanner cannot guarantee the best output, it should
give you the best image to start with. Just make sure that
every piece of equipment in your workflow is correctly
Dave King [EMAIL PROTECTED], wrote:
I was thinking further about this today and realized I don't know what
the bias adjustment does. Many monitors only have gain controls, and so
now I'm wondering how bias is different than gain, how it's used during
calibration, and the advantages (?) for color
Dave asked:
Well, I was satisfied by Julian's answer, it was easy and practical. But
your answer has me wondering again about what is actually happening at the
circuit level. I guess they are voltage amplifiers operating at different
frequencies? Presumably the gain control isn't particularly
Dave King [EMAIL PROTECTED], wrote:
I'm assuming you researched the CRT situation before buying the Sony
GMD-F520. Do you know if it has individually adjustable guns?
Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. Individually adjustable gain and bias for each gun.
I was thinking further
Please keep this topic on list! It's of very high relevance IMHO, and those
who say not can just skip this thread. Fair enough?
Thanks,
Dave King
- Original Message -
From: Ezio c/o TIN [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:35 PM
Subject
I'm wondering if it's advisable to clean the light path from time to time,
and if so how big a PITA it is. Anyone had one of these apart (or the
ArtixScan equivalent)? Is there a service manual available?
TIA,
Dave King
- Original Message -
From: Julian Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 11:52 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Tips needed on difficult scan
Being endlessly interested in contrast taming, I just tried this but
obviously I am missing something
Yep, I'm happy bringing a flat hi-bit Vuescan into PS to do final color/tone
correction. I set up Vuescan to get all the tones the scanner can get, and
then I use the shift up/down arrow trick to dial in the final correction.
It's very helpful and shows you where things are at quickly.
I also
Bottom
line here is: we all have our opinions and the perfect scanner software
hasn't been written yet.
I agree completely. SilverFast is a nice product, and the engineers
at LaserSoft are quite good.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
But they're not on this list every day helping end users find good
- Original Message -
From: Ian Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some one should clue Silverfast in that it's a new day.
WE have and they listen and they are slowly actioning the necessary
modifications - just you haven't been watching :-0
BTW: SilverFast operates on the high bit data and has
- Original Message -
From: Lloyd O'Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can give you my opinion on part of this comparison. I have a
SS4000,
bought 2 years ago at $1425. A friend of mine recently purchased a
SS120. I
scanned a couple of 35mm slides on his 120 that I had previously
scanned on
Rob Geraghty wrote:
Wouldn't you need something matte - like a black matte paint for
plastic
models? Magic marker ink might not take enough shine out of the
plastic.
Yeah, maybe. But a few years ago when I had this problem with 4x5
film
(I had a reflection about 1/4 into the film on the
Film grain. You don't say how big this sample would be. For example,
if the entire frame was 6x9 at 300dpi?
NPS 160 has bigger grain when scanned than it should. Fujicolor 800
is about the same! I have found that to be true on an Agfa T-2500,
Nikon LS-30, and a Polaroid SS4000. May be
the advent of such CCD
scanners as the Flextight and even the better 35mm prosumer units,
and it's getting less expensive as time goes on also.
Dave King
- Original Message -
From: John Straus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 4:35 PM
Subject: Re
I use (as you may have seen by now) Fuji NHGII, and Superia is said to
be identical to Fuji Press 800, but Fuji reps have told me Superia is
more grainy with a bit more contrast. The published specs (I think,
not double checking) say equal grain however, and I've never done
critical comparisons.
I wonder that myself, and speculate it may have something to do with
the base mask dye layer and some kind of "stacking" phenomena of
similar color dyes. I've noticed that grain looks bigger (in scans
and looking directly at negs magnified on the light table) in the
areas where dye color is
Out of curiosity I called Fuji tech support and got the skinny on
grain and resolution in 800 speed films. NHGII has been replaced by
the next generation, NPZ 800 Professional, and Press 800 and Superia
800 continue as before. All of them have the same specification for
grain and res, RMS
I'm only guessing, but I think with an accurate conversion and the
same basic process applied individual film qualities could be
preserved, more or less. Depends how itchy your Photoshop trigger
finger gets too:) I find that once I'm in Photoshop I'm just going
for the best overall correction I
I don't either, in the literal sense. He oversaw the printing.
d
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
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.
You go right ahead and doubt Austin. Based on the orientation you
espouse on this list, I really could care less what
He also had an independent printer who's name I don't recall, but who
is still around I think, who printed the exhibition prints I referred
to. Bresson is said to have worked with this one printer most of his
career.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Larry Berman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
A Polaroid SS4000, courtesy of the recent great price. Before that an
LS-30 and both using VueScan.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 11:57 PM
Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: 2700ppi a limiting
I want to apologize for the brusque tone in my previous post.
Gee, thanks ;-)
What I
should have said, and am saying now, is that based on what you
write
here I doubt you would think these particular prints look great.
And
that, of course, is your choice, and it's OK with me that you
Ed,
You're spoiling me:) I don't know if recent improvements are the
reason or I just didn't try hard enough before, but I'm getting better
color neg Agfa T-2500 scans with VueScan now than FotoLook. The
SS4000 for 35mm and the T-2500 for anything bigger are both running
VueScan and happy.
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Obscanning: Has anyone else noticed the difference in sharpness
between
their lenses when scanning films?
Rob
Not particularly, but nearly all of my Nikkors are at least pretty
good, and some of them are excellent. The softest 35mm lens I own is
a Sigma
Harvey,
Sorry for the stupid question, but have you done this test in an
effectively dark room? Perhaps you're seeing ambient light begin to
contribute to exposure? For ambient light not to have any effect on
exposure it should be at least 5 stops below the working setting.
I thought the
That could explain this. My 1000 w/s dynalites are probably shorter
duration than the 2400 w/s packs. Love the Chemical Bros BTW. Fun
stuff.
Dave
From: SKID Photography [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For the record, we use ProFoto studio lights, where we've
experienced the 250th of a second cut off of
Fast sync speeds being desirable, maximum sync in any particular
design is determined by that fastest speed where entire frame is still
open at once. Another one that doesn't require an engineering degree
to understand:)
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Margins are cool.
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 9:45 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Pixels per inch vs DPI
Fast sync speeds being desirable, maximum sync in any particular
design is determined by
I'm using the 4000 for the first time since an initial test to
make
sure it worked properly. I've been trying Insight, Vuescan and
Silverfast 5.1 ai on a Win 98 box. So far all my scans are color
negs.
You should try Version 5.5 if scanning negatives. It is a LOT
better. You
can
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't leave anything out...it doesn't matter WHAT size pixel, a
pixel is
but a single value of tonality, period. A pixel does NOT contain
the same
amount of information as A dye cloud. As I said, dye clouds are
variable in
shape, and a pixel is
way round.
BTW, Vuescan is working very well, no complaints there. Just
wondering if I can get up to speed with Insight too.
Thanks,
Dave King
There really isn't that much to it when you realize (finally:) that
you should hold the carrier so that you're only gripping it by the
edges of the bottom part. This allows the top part to bow when you
push the release tab, and then it's very easy to open.
Dave
- Original Message -
(profile comes in here), and high bit output.
I'm another one who prefers doing final edits on high bit files in PS.
Dave King
- Original Message -
From: David Corwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
First thing I would is to calibrate the ss4000 using supplied
target. Print
out the documentation from
I haven't been following this thread of late, but isn't there a
setting that takes longer but DOES NOT band at all? If so, why not
just use that? Epson printers frequently band at all but the slowest
settings, so that's what I always use. This would seem like a similar
situation?
Just
I was in the same boat as you, and of the same opinion, until I
downloaded a recent version of Vuescan. I'm very impressed with the
improvements Ed has made recently (I use an LS-30). There are still
occasions where Nikonscan seems to get the better range of colors with
chromes (after editing
- Original Message -
From: rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 01:11 PM 7/16/01 -0400, Dave King wrote:
I disagree with him (Margulis) on one point however, and I consider
myself a color balance freak. Why? In an average color
photograph,
global color contrast is maximized at one point
It'll get better as more jobs are shot digitally. Then the repro
folks won't have as much incentive to sabotage jobs not scanned in
house since there's no film anyway.
Even with photographer supplied scans this behavior will eventually
backfire on honery and stubborn printers because clients
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Test Imacon, Nikon.Polaroid
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 01:17:28 -0400 Dave King
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
If there are no mirrors in either
I disagree with him (Margulis) on one point however, and I consider
myself a color balance freak. Why? In an average color photograph,
global color contrast is maximized at one point only -- the most
accurate color balance possible for that scene. I just don't see
how one can get there working
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 9:32 AM
Subject: RE: Unsharp mask was Re: filmscanners: Getting started
question
He issued a challenge
(as he often
does) to these consultants to provide details of
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
Art wrote:
Many moons ago, I was working on the concept of a system to allow
a 35mm
frame to be projected on a flatbed scanner surface. This could,
in
theory, allow for even a 600 dpi scanner to record a 35mm frame
at about
4800 x 7200 ppi,
The primary advantage of the Imacon design is the unfolded light path
correct? The mirrors can't be helping with the less expensive
scanners. Only absolute disadvantage to the straight path approach is
physical size of the scanner(?), and of course, in the case of the
Imacon, cost.
Dave
-
Quickpoint mounts available from Reel 3-D really work for the 35mm
curved slide problem. Glassless, very flat, and nearly full frame.
The mounts have strips of sticky adhesive top and bottom, you mount
the slide with a slight bend in the mount, then it pulls flat. Highly
recommended.
It is better in practice of course, but with a little forethought and
extra work that benefit can be negated.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Test Imacon,
- Original Message -
From: rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:47 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Test Imacon, Nikon.Polaroid
At 03:57 PM 7/13/01 -0400, Austin wrote:
The primary advantage of the Imacon design is the unfolded light
path
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 7:34 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon LS IV/Nikoscan 3.0
Dave King wrote:
Rafe, you are right on the money.
Dave
Luckily, most lists aren't much about money. ;-)
Art
scanners that are capable of results that are essentially good
enough for any conceivable critical use with film up to medium format
size.
Dave King
At 10:41 PM 7/10/01 -0400, Dave King wrote:
Enjoy. This and the new Nikon are the first generation of CCD film
scanners that are capable of results that are essentially good
enough for any conceivable critical use with film up to medium
format
size.
I'm not sure I agree there, Dave
Andrea,
The calibrated auto correction will try to match the chrome for color
in whatever state it's in, but it sets the end points (contrast) for a
good black and white. My guess is you're getting scans that are too
contrasty to correct. You can put contrast in, but if you take it out
you
Rafe, you are right on the money.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Raphael Bustin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon LS IV/Nikoscan 3.0
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
Is the criticism valid? Yeah, it
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) wrote:
I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the deep south of the
US.
I'm
, or wasn't the Minolta CLE also sold in a different
skin
as a Leica?
Dave King wrote:
I'm a big Minolta CLE fan also. I sold my Leica M camera years
ago to
get one. It doesn't have the build quality of an M, and the auto
exposure shutter electronics can be finicky (don't shoot
C-41 film has so much latitude that manufactures can rate it one to
two stops faster than the optimal speed and get away with it. But at
the optimal speed, all photographic qualities (grain size, resolution,
and color accuracy) is best. More exposure than best exposure is
less detrimental than
: Film grain
Dave King wrote:
...it's not really overexposing the film to rate it one
to two stops slower than the manufacture's recommendation.
This might work particularly well in a studio environment, but I'm
wondering
how it would work in direct sunlight. I'm tempted to try it, to get
On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:19:27 -0400 rafeb ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
I also don't really believe in film-grain aliasing --
film grain is essentially non-periodic, or, more
accurately white noise -- ie, containing
an even distribution of frequency element
It's not though - it's pink
'Popular Photography' is to Photography as 'The Sound of Music' is to
Music.
ted orland
Robert Wright
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:53:25 +0200
From: Oostrom, Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: LS-4000ED Dmax 4,2 or rather 2,3?
I just read in Popular Photography about a test
I use Frontier prints for my commercial clients who need quantity
prints. The requirement is to prepare an output size TIFF file at 300
dpi, and tagged sRGB. My studio system is calibrated using
ColorVision PhotoCal and Profiler Pro, and the Frontier prints are
practically identical to my 1160
Doing successive previews, I recently found I couldn't revert to the
start over point. How does one do this?
Dave
My 7.1.3 has a seperate control for Image Brightness and Gamma.
Image brightness will affect the blacks of the image, Gamma not so
much.
I often leave Black to .01 or so
Options
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Dave King [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan Settings
| Doing successive previews, I recently found I couldn't revert to
the
| start over point. How does one do
.
Dave King
Kodachrome has better dark storage than E-6. E-6 is better for use in
slide projectors, but any valuable transparency should be duped for
slide projection anyway.
Brian Eno (the musician) points out the most relevant issue regarding
the digital vs analogue archiving issue. He said something to
Austin Franklin wrote (among other things):
I think for around $2k, if you get one complete with Leafset
holders, latest
firmware (4.1) and in great working condition, nothing can touch it.
If you
need 4x5, then it's really the only under $7k option I would say.
If your
max is 120, then you
I just use 7.1.1 for the first time today and I'm very impressed with
the recent improvements to the cleaning and sharpening using
Fujichrome 100 on my LS-30. So then, hoping against hope, I scanned
one of my problem Kodachromes, but no luck. I isolated the problem
to the cleaning function.
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 07:33:35 -0700 Moreno Polloni ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
I don't think anyone is trying to make super critical judgements
here.
To me
the scans need to be better matched before attempting to draw any
conclusions about scanner
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I may be jumping into water over my head here, but I don't
understand the
issue. What differences are we talking about here? Excellent
output
can be
obtained via either procedure. Personally, the only difference
that
seems
still
From: Dan Honemann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Take a look at the Leafscan 45 sample vs. the Nikon ED 4000 about
halfway
down the page at this site:
http://www.pytlowany.com/nikontest.html
One of us is hallucinating, or one of us is blind. I sure
don't see the astonishing difference you're
From: Dan Honemann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Take a look at the Leafscan 45 sample vs. the Nikon ED 4000 about
halfway
down the page at this site:
http://www.pytlowany.com/nikontest.html
To me, the difference is astonishing, as if the Nikon image were
viewed
through a veil of haze, while the
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm a REAL minimalist. I develop my own film, and make sure it has
NO
particulate matter on it after it is dry, and put it into ClearFile
holders
to keep dust off of them, then into a 3 ring SEALED notebook, and
into a
file cabinet. I use a filtered
I see the last snips never made it to the list. Did you get them
(sent directly to you)?
Dave
David, would you be kind enough to post the same two images that you
did
previously, but this time using the unsharp masking you feel best
glorifies the Agfa scan.
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:45:13 -0400 Dave King
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Sorry Tony, but I don't agree with this. Neg films vary primarily
in
the mask layer.
But that seems to be a variable, since mask density appears to vary
according to processing
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 6/10/2001 6:22:35 PM EST,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Agfa is definitely softer,
no argument there, but when I apply unsharp masking to the Agfa
scan
on the order of 75%, 0.8 radius, 0 threshold to the Agfa scan,
which
is my normal amount
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
