http://www.freidesignberlin.de/home.php
Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
On Feb 11, 2008 9:48 AM, Bob Geoghegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While we're talking about SCSI scanners under current OSs, how 'bout Vista?
> I'm running an SS4000 on a Win XP laptop through an Adaptec 1480B. The card
> is supported under Vista, but I don't know what to expect for the scanner.
On 6/8/07, James L. Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with you, Tony, Digital cameras, for all practical purposes, has
> surpassed the quality of 35mm format film and I believe that happened
> with the arrival of the six megapixel camera, a few years ago,
> significant cropping, not withsta
On 6/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been having a problem with my Polaroid SprintScan 4000
> scanner. Polaroid technical support hasn't been very helpful, so
> I'm wondering if someone out there might have experienced this
> problem and know something about the cause/s
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>I have just started using my new Sprintscan 4000. before I invest a lot of
>time in the learning curve, can anyone recommend which scanner software is
>best for which users? Insight and Silversoft are included with the
>scanner,
>and I could easily get Vuescan.
I have
I recall, as someone mentioned, that Ian Lyons had pointed up the usefulness
of USM, or perhaps sharpening in general, in Silverfast, even that it is
superior to PS, I think. There is an "Auto Sharpen" filter and the USM
filter has many parameters, even seemingly beyond those in PS.
My problem
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>My alibi is that I stated, "As a general rule, sharpening shouldn't be done
>more than once" and even Bruce Fraser indicates that my comments are in
>agreement with "conventional wisdom." Nevertheless, you and Michael
>Shaffer are quite correct in pointing out tha
>Given the heavy slant towards the negative films, in terms of profiles,
>makes one wonder if VueScan isn't primarily aimed at negative film scanning
>rather than positive film?
>
>Shunith
The recommended setting for slide film under "Device/Media Type" is "Image"
rather than "Slide Film," which
How are folks using Silverfast unsharp mask vis a vis Photoshop? I'd like
to do some sharpening on the scan side but leave a little final sharpening
to be done in PS. I don't know if this is a good idea or not. In any case,
what looks fairly good to me in Silverfast seems crude and unusable
>From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Joel,
>
> >> Can you elaborate (since the SS4000 is well-nigh perfect )?
>
>It's closer to perfection.
>
>You write a list of all things you think are great about the SS4000 and
>I'll
>tell you which have been bettered. I could save you the bother and say tha
>From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000
[snip]
Can you elaborate (since the SS4000 is well-nigh perfect )?
Joel W.
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.c
> >E200 does have really fine grain, somewhat at the expense of
> >resolution/sharpness (as compared to the ASA 100 films).
> >
> >Joel W.
>
>From: Herm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I cant tell, is this called accutance? or are you saying that its not as
>sharp
>as ASA100 slide films?.. in any case I use
>From: Herm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[RE: Pro Ektachrome E200]
>Kodak also makes a consumer version of this film, called Elite Chrome 200.
>It
>also performs the same but I believe it reacts a bit different to +3 stop
>push
>(I'm not sure, perhaps a bit faster than ASA1000, slight color shift to
>
>From: "Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I think there is only one happy scanner owner, Ed, in this forum. He is not
>using it mainly for slides though. The rest of people probably own drum
>scanners or do not own scanners at all.
>
>I would expect more input from people owning scanners in $600-$1500 p
>>I am planning on taking pictures at a high school indoor sporting
>>event with available as well as flash lighting. I have a Canon FS
>>2710 scanner. I would prefer to use slide film. I have had mixed
>>results with previous attempts using Fugi and Kodak commercial 400
>>and 800 print films.(ver
>From: Mark Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writ in part:
>I admit it was processed by a non-pro lab, so this ain't scientific
>evidence, but I would hesitate to ever use this film again in early morning
>or late afternoon light, esp. now after hearing these comments on the list.
Right, but also don't
>From: Roger Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Anybody out there used Kodak's E100VS film?
Roger,
I use this film in addition to Provia F and Velvia. I prefer Velvia for
landscape. The E100VS can be a little OTT in really warm light, but it is
often very good in flat light that can make Provia
>From: "shAf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: OK, Vuescan is driving me nuts
>Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 11:43:30 -0700
>
>Jeffrey writes ...
>
> > >I suppose I am with Lynn ... afterall, whether you use Vuescan to
> > >crop, or
Konica Impresa 50 is quite good on sky IMHO.
Joel W.
>From: "Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Slide film is generally less grainy than print film in scanning sky. Have
>you found any good print film for sky?
_
Get your F
>From: "shAf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> It would seem a user could "crop" a small rectangle and ask for a
>"manual" focus ... then crop preferentially and scan with "automatic"
>focus disabled(?) I've never been able to verify if this works ...
>even while my LS-2000 goes through the motions, the
>From: Charles Platt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Having only joined this list recently, I don't know if there's been
>discussion on Polaroid vs. Nikon 4000 dpi scanners.
I don't think you're going to get a lot of answers because not many of us
with SS4000s are racing off to the Nikon 4000 since it is a
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/6/2001 9:54:57 AM EST,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I see. This raises the question of what the zoom
> > feature is for, and it sounds like you intend it
> to be
> > useful for cropping in the main.
>
> Yes, it's mainly useful for adjust
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 3/5/2001 5:33:29 PM EST,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > As an alternative to scroll bars, would it be
> possible
> > to use instead a hand to grab the image with the
> mouse
> > and pull it to the location one wants, like
> ACDSee?
>
> The
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 1) Adding a "Zoom in" and "Zoom out" button that
> will double
> (or halve) the size of either the preview or scan
> images. While
> zoomed, the preview or scan window will have scroll
> bars.
As an alternative to scroll bars, would it be possible
to use instead a
Hello John,
--- John Bradbury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If all the images are exposed with a varying light
> source and some are
> backlit Nikonscan is the software to use.
> Nikonscan seems to treat each frame with "respect",
> Vuescan seems to use the
> exposure from the first frame as the n
hould take care of it as well.
Joel Wilcox
- Original Message -
From: "Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 7:30 PM
Subject: VueScan & Epson 636U
>
> I am a VueScan newbie trying to get this up and running for t
ng a bit, and then adjusting the
color balance to even it with the adjacent areas. Not very elegant, and not
always perfect, but sometimes it was good enough.
Regards,
Joel Wilcox
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http:/
27 matches
Mail list logo
