I thought to post this yesterday, but decided not to because much of it is
redundant to what has been discussed here lately, and it is long. However,
I've decided to post it now because Roy cites some DyR definitions from
audio that I think will help us move away from the fixation of bits that
Austin wrote:
Reference this diagram:
http://www.darkroom.com/Images/DynamicRange01.jpg
largest is shown on this diagram to be the maximum signal level minus the
minimum signal level, and is the largest range or absolute range that the
signal can go from = to. Example, maximum signal level is
Julian
This sounds like an amazingly lucid explanation. Thanks for clarifying that.
I know I've looked at a lot of audio references and have yet to see a
density range specification within them. Electrical components just don't
seem to have density ranges, they have dynamic ranges, which is a
on 8/29/02 5:26 AM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
but do you realize that the range that Austin is using as
his Dmin for the ISO formula is the ENTIRE density range of the scanner?
Austin's explained this: in any dynamic range calculation, the maximum
signal level can be seen as corresponding
To David and Austin
Austin replies to me:
Let me repeat, this paper says DyR is: if noise is present, the difference
between the loudest (maximum level) signal to the noise floor.
This is in contrast to Austin who says DyR is: (maximum signal level -
minimum signal level) / noise)
They
rulers, one a 12 marked in
1/16 increments, the other 24 marked in 1/4 increments. If we understand
DyR to be the ability to measure further from one endpoint to another, the
longer ruler has the capacity to record the greater DyR (24), not the one
with the greater resolution (12).
Todd Flashner
on 8/9/02 10:29 AM, Austin Franklin wrote:
You will notice, it is exactly as I have described it, a RANGE.
I do not see ANYWHERE where it says dynamic range is a range. It shows
the RESULT of a calculation WITHIN A RANGE (Dmax), divided by the noise
(Dmin), but the result is NOT a range.
Bob
I have a lot of respect for the knowledge of Austin and Art but I recommend
you do read the references from Brian, which support my experience.
Cold light heads have gotten a lot of hype over time because people like
Ansel Adams spoke highly of them. The Howard bond articles explains nicely
on 6/29/02 6:08 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
Hi Todd,
but no light source is capable of giving a better print than the other, in
and of, itself.
Except for that darned Callier effect...which makes point light sources more
susceptible to depth of focus, as well as dust, scratches etc.
on 6/29/02 10:51 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
the
Callier effect is predicable, and in some cases useful, and can be
compensated for as needed.
What about the limited depth of focus, as well as scratches and dust? How
do you compensate for that?
Well for me, dust and scratches fall under
Hi Austin,
That's absolutely NOT true. You do NOT get softer images with less contrast
from a diffuse (typically called cold) light source.
There has always been a controversy about the merits of
cold-lights. Careful tests have proven that exactly the same tonal
rendition can be
on 6/12/02 9:33 AM, Austin Franklin wrote:
Which is true...as he says as seen by the scanner...and, some people take
that to mean that slide film has more dynamic range, but the slide film in
fact has less dynamic range than negative film, though slide film does have
a higher density range.
Slides and negatives have
only density
ranges inherently, not dynamic ranges.
So you claim film has no inherent noise, in and of it self, unless you are
viewing it? Does the noise of music recorded on a CD not exist until it
isn't being played?
I think you're being really obscure
Oops, forgot the link, FWIW...
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/report/S2Pro-020602/index.htm
--
From: Todd Flashner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 04:25:08 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Scene brightness and CCDs
The number of stops of brightness that film can hold
Thanks Robert,
Long time since I've been right about anything. ;-)
Todd
Todd,
--- Todd Flashner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on 11/24/01 1:26 PM, Robert Meier wrote:
Well, it seems everybody agrees that these are Newton Rings.
Well, I'll be the outsider and say I don't think those
of the less common and relevant
aspects of imaging, I say go for it! and sign me up.
Todd Flashner
It's amazing -- and sad -- just how often a few of those on this list seem
driven to engage in hair-splitting arguments about anything not seen quite
their way by another. I've no idea
on 4/17/02 2:46 PM, Laurie Solomon wrote:
Todd,
On another list, in a thread similar to this one, (fed up with the
esoterica), the complainer facetiously suggested someone start a list
called
The Noise, where all these less-than-everyday-useful discussions can air
freely, (and I would
.
Is the max scan size of the transparency adapter sufficient for 35mm
contacts using 6 rows of 6 frames PrintFile sleeves?
Overall, how's the hardware, how's the software? Likes, dislikes???
Any feedback is appreciated.
Todd Flashner
Laurie any and all these reasons may be correct, but the question remains,
why is being locked into a cropped image deemed preferable to giving the
option to crop OR go full frame, like a drum scan, or like photographers who
file their own carriers?
I am of the mind that tradition has gotten
Can any of the new crop of medium format scanners have their film holders
modified to produce full frame scans for both 35mm and 120mm formats?
I like the filed out film holder approach, which reveals some film base, and
yields a black border around the frame.
Todd
on 12/23/01 1:59 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
It is possible for 35mm and maybe some of the smaller medium format sizes -
645 and 6x6 - on the Minolta Scan Multi and Multi II (I do not know about
the Multi Pro, although I suspect it is possible there too). However, I do
not think you would
To Austin:
I think Harvey's point is that there may come a situation where someone
wants a sharp scan of a blurry image. Why not, it's art! ;-)
Austin wrote:
You must be referring to color. I only talk about BW, and there is no
inherent flaw in scanning BW, if you do not scan BW in RGB. The
on 12/2/01 10:25 PM, SKID Photography wrote:
We are contemplating the purchase of a Howtek, and were wondering how long the
drums actually last. I had
always assumed that they sort of lasted forever unless you dropped them or the
like, but I keep on hearing
about 'crazing'.
Harvey
I
This is really no mystery, it's just that the neg holders are fairly
thick, and somewhat reflective. This has always been a problem with
large format enlargers with their thicker neg holders, and easily
fixed. A little matte black paint around the inside edge of the
holder goes a long
Bravo! Your support is exemplary!
I hope they pay you well. ;-)
Todd
The petition has been received and is being acted on!
David
This is really no mystery, it's just that the neg holders are fairly
thick, and somewhat reflective. This has always been a problem with
large format
ShAf
I haven't been following from the beginning so I'm not clear on what you are
trying to do, but two/three things things:
Different RGB color spaces will yield different values for the same color.
That's why when you convert to profile you can choose to keep the appearance
of the colors, but
.
Are we starting to talk the same language?
I apologize for coming into this in the middle, it surely adds to the
confusion.
Todd
I've come of retirement for this one :-)
From: Todd Flashner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ned
_
Get
on 11/11/01 8:54 PM, Rob Geraghty wrote:
PS Can someone confirm for me that all this discussion of IDE RAID is
irrelevent
to Mac users? Are there IDE RAID solutions for Mac?
There are IDE RAID solutions for the Mac but not many. Only around three or
4 last I looked. Sonnet and Acard make
5 frames in one strip. the 1640SU can't do that as the transparency unit is
only large enough to fit a 3 frame strip.
i'm keeping an eye out for tabloid scanners on ebay now.
thanks much.
~j
You'd be well served to get a scanner like Austin describes. I looked for a
while then
on 10/27/01 11:41 AM, Austin Franklin wrote:
Sorry, you're not right. I believe the 12 bit data is raw data with no
setpoints at all...those have to be manually set in PS. The 12 data will be
high bit justified in the 16 bit word, and no intermediate values will be
interpolated and there
on 10/22/01 10:04 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
I'm sure it comes as no surprise, but my vote for best film scanner for BW
is the Leafscan.
The reason being it uses a single neutral density filter for BW scans,
instead of using all three (or even one or more) of the color channels to
derive
Shough,
Just how is this chart/print supposed to be interpreted? At first I thought
all resolutions printed well on my Epson1160 with MIS VM quadtone inks. Then
I noticed that there are heavy lines scattered about within each resolution
target, but then I looked at the PDF, and they are there
Todd writes:
It's called licensing.
I know what it is called. However, having a name for it doesn't make it
ethical.
Here's a fortune cookie for ya, Anthony:
You have great energy, put it to good use.
Todd
You missed nothing. ;-)
Todd
I'm not a pro by any means -- just a rank amateur having fun, but if you
believe $200 less expenses is a good wage for a photographer, I'm sure never
entering the business. Best case, that's $25 an hour, if there were no
expenses and it was an eight hour day.
But is it really
ethical to do work just once, and then expect to be paid for it forever?
Nobody
else has that privilege.
It's called licensing. The music industry, film industry, and software
industry, are based upon it, to name just a few.
Todd
on 9/9/01 1:51 AM, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
If there
are other reasons why someone would want to license a thumbnail image or a
web resolution image in contrast to a high resolution and/or larger sized
image, I would be interested in increasing my awareness.
Banner ads.
Todd
Isn't this boundary the halo that USM is built upon? The idea of USM (and
this is way to short an explanation) is to introduce just such edge contrast
around and/or between objects and transition zones. The width of these halos
are controlled by the Radius slider in the USM dialog box. Try
Sharpening is typically best done at the end, after manipulations, and
catered to a particular size/resolution/use. With that in mind, if you want
to use Nik, but it over sharpens for you, here's how I'd apply it. This is
but one way, but it's a good down and dirty way, short of sharpening
38 matches
Mail list logo
