tly "crop" the
same file with complete freedom for choosing Vuescan's modes of
dust/defect correction (or not). With 48bit, then you have no options
for dust/defect correction.
shAf :o)
(btw ... happy to hear everything else worked in other regards )
rly versions of your motherboard
and faster (than 350Mhz) CPUs. Search the Adobe technical reports for
"Photoshop freezes" ...
shAf :o)
s or 8bit, ... that is, the 16=>8bit
conversion will round the pixel value to the same as if
were done in 8bits. It can however, be argued ... for
^many^ actions, they all be done in 16bit so that 16bit
precision preserves the pixel value accuracy between all
actions, before the final 16=>8bit conversion.
my US$0.02 ... shAf :o)
ine-pairs if worst case ... at 45
degrees.
shAf :o)
be
capable of 3000-4000ppi for Kodachrome 25(?)
shAf :o)
ot; format
inefficiently ...) See:
http://www.cerious.com/
shAf :o)
athematicians may deal with more abstract observations and
hypotheses, but they ustilize the same method.
myUS$0.02 ... shAf
btw ... isn't it about time we changed the subject(?) ... at least,
the subject line(?)
ads 24 bit files? Or that it can only save
24bit
> files? That could be a problem with cataloguing the raw or 48bit
files from
> Vuescan.
My Thumbs+ reads 48bit files just fine ... it even reads and
creates thumbs for the TIFs with an IR channel!
shAf :o)
deviation" of pixel values outside the "average" value ...
the std dev is your measure of noise.
shAf :o)
Your thoughts are much appreciated ...
shAf :o)
problem.jpg
onsistent service in my area.
shAf :o)
bsequently
wrote a cropped file, Photoshop would open it automatically ... and
waited for me to indicate the proper profile was embedded ... it
couldn't have worked much better if VS was a twain plugin :o)
shAf :o)
Win/98
Photoshop 6
Nikon LS-2000
7;focus', you could add a "batch"
mode, which does both during the scan automatically ... and disables
preview.
Don't let me to appear ungrateful ... au contraire ... it's just that
if I'm going to dedicate 15minutes to a highbit scan and archiving
50Mbs of RGB, I'd like something to say about the exposure (... altho
an automatic determination by Vuescan is not a bad way to go
...*smile*...)
shAf :o)
p;white horizontal lines ... but I
had to admit being a bit surprised by the above test ... gray levels
are correct values, and the pattern would seem to accommodate at least
some "risetime" problems. (Having entered into this thread a bit
late) Was there any consensus as to the most appropriate B/W pattern
for most monitors??
shAf :o)
d TIFFs go with it, which should clearly indicate what needs
to be repaired, and ask that a final TIFF be scanned and compared
before the unit is give back to you.
... report back to us ...
good luck ... shAf :o)
rofile-to-profile. It would seem they have
to purchase, or otherwise obtain the rights for the Adobe (or Kodak)
CMM engines(?) Does PSP allow any method for going from a device
color space to sRGB? ... or does it simply put your RGB data in sRGB
space?
shAf :o)
2000, and generate 2 TIFFs. With all due respect to the Nikon
techs, it is all too often they install problematic Nikons on their
computers and do not see the same thing.
shAf :o)
are instead aimed at monitor color spaces. Since sRGB is a working
color space which is also aimed at "most" monitors, it is probably
PSP's assumption it can simply "whack the data into the sRGB colour
space". Simply putting RGB data into any working color space is not a
proper implimentation of the profile ... PSP does need to find a
conversion engine.
shAf :o)
anced "misc" preferences and alter the percent blackpoint
and whitepoints slightly, just to see what happens.
I have also seen similar misrepresentations of the RGB data using the
PS histogram ... you might want tp check its settings ... turning its
cache on/off.
HTH ... shAf :o)
..). Vuescan writes a raw RGB
file easily ... with NS, you have to turn CMS off and request a
gamma=1 (... except to get a raw image out of NS which looked at like
Vuescan's, I had to set the gamma=0.85 ...)
shAf :o)
inally scan,
then Vuescan behaves normally. I have no idea if this is a quirk with
Vuescan+my_LS2000, or what ... I should play around more with saving
preferences at specific steps of my procedure. That is, I tend to
create the raw file first, and then point vuescan at the
device=scan000n.tif for the subsequent crop000n.tif.
shAf :o)
Tim Atherton writes ...
> They are still working on a lot of the testing right now. What they
gave us
> was based on what testing they have done so far. A lot of the long
term
> aging stuff is still underway. What they had done was a lot of
testing for
> disaster recovery - flooding, fire etc.
>
Tim Atherton writes ...
> Why don't I just pass on the notes and info I marked as being
important for
> me after I did this workshop (which I think has already been posted
once
> here...) :)
... and thank you for these notes!!!
>
> ...
> In fact one of the biggest areas with longevity apar
Ed writes ...
> I just released VueScan 6.3.19 ...
Thanx Ed :o)
I was thinking ... and I have no idea what
it would involve programming-wise ... but it would
be real cool if you could apply your efforts
towards image cleaning with ICE, as a Photoshop
plugin. Imagine being abl
Rob writes ...
> >In a message dated 12/11/2000 12:34:38 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> >> Imagine being able to select only certain
> >> regions where dust is noticeable, and apply your
> >> filter plugin selectively(?!)
>
> Is it possible to work with an RGBI image in Photoshop? If not,
Ed writes ...
> Interestingly, the cleaning algorithm in VueScan (which is
> completely different than ICE) doesn't soften the image
> at all, except in the area around actual dust spots. The
> ICE algorithm softens the image throughout when used.
And after giving some thought, why should e
Dieder writes ...
> Anyone know how I can go about doing a copy'n'paste of a 16
> bit image out of two separate 16 bit/channel images?
> Photoshop doesn't let me do that, ...
Apparently not possible (I say apparently because I haven't tried
with PS6 yet, but copy isn't available while in
Altho, getting a bit OT, I thought many users here could use a
general reference for burning CDs and the software available. The
following URL has a link, "Burning CD basics", which includes an
overview and a link to the "CD burning FAQ" ...
http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/recent_art
Tony writes ...
> > I have heard of the Nero Burn software. Is there a consensus
> > of opinion about this over Adaptec?
>
> NERO has a good reputation. Personally I use Gear, which is
> idiosyncratic and strange but very clever with buffering,
> it never produces coasters unless I do something
Dave writes ...
> ...
>
> I have a couple hundred 100-foot rolls of 35mm negative
> film, exposed and processed,
> ...
>
> These are my unique requirements:
>
> 1. Ability to thread 100-foot rolls without cutting into
> strips. ...
From what I can tell, the Kodak RFS 3600 should be ab
Henry writes ...
> Ed didn't send this to the list so I will forward it.
>
>
> In a message dated 12/14/2000 4:16:58 PM EST,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> ...
>
> > Further, is it also true that there is no real
> > disadvantage to always using the strongest filter
> > -- Scour -- instead of
Dale writes ...
> I've narrowed my choices down to three scanners. The Nikon
> LS2000, Minolta Scan Elite and the Polaroid 4000.
> My first two choices are based on the IR/ICE feature and
> the Polaroid because (according to their web site) has a
> dust/scratch removal feature in the software th
other side. His implication was to always label the inner part
of the CD, OR buy blanks with a painted side, OR used stick-on labels
which wouldn't imbalaced the disk.
shAf :o)
in or noise compared to the processed scan, but the
> image lacks contrast and the colours look washed out.
> ...
I have a feeling the noise/grain will reappear as soon as the "raw"
scan is corrected for achieving similar contrast.
shAf :o)
g better precision for a combination of
adjustments ... or (3) make all your adjustments with "adjustment
layers", which applys all adjustments as a single combined
calculation.
shAf :o)
cs based on the bits from the A/D.
> ...
Keep in mind ... just because the bit depth allows for greater
optical density, it doesn't mean that noise or some other CCD problem
is the weak link in the practical application of the scanner's optical
density.
shAf :o)
le? Would another profile give me a wider range of colors?
There is something to be said about "if it works, don't fool with it"
... but you probably are losing some control for editting your
scanner's true color gamut if using sRGB is short changing it.
shAf :o)
bits, these values can be put between 1024 and 4096,
therefore extending the range of the CCD's exposure and increasing its
dynamic range (... or reducing the possibility of no detail in the
shadows or highlights ...).
shAf :o)
er AdobeRGB gamut?
> ...
In theory yes ... but the addition gamut would be beyond your
display, and you wouldn't be able to see what you're doing(?)
shAf :o)
Julian writes ...
> At 02:31 11/01/01, shAf wrote:
> > What you say is true, but you haven't taken into
> account the CCD's
> >response to exposure ... that is, it can't be changed.
> This means if
> >you overexpose, then you either need a very h
gt;
> Well, that makes perfect sense - as I understand it, the
> profile is simply a
> mapping between numeric values and actual colours.
>
I think you better examine the RGB pixel values before and after a
profile-to-profile ...
shAf :o)
sRGB device space to AdobeRGB because it seems to work best
(even if the desired detail not existing in the original gamut did not
transfer).
I sometimes wonder if film-scanner users are aware of large gamuts
in film ... but most are. My own feeling is it is the detail which
makes most photographs interesting, and that detail isn't only a
matter for 2700ppi vs 4000ppi ... much of the detail is in the color!
shAf :o)
Robert writes ...
regarding my response ...
\> > I think you better examine the RGB pixel values before and after
a
> > profile-to-profile ...
> >
> > shAf :o)
> >
> I think...
> Profile to profile changes the file(pixel values) but changing the
"so
>
ocess than the
developing process. My own experience is they are easily removed, but
I wouldn't use my Nikon's film feeder with the slightest amount of
residual gum.
shAf :o)
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mike Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> T
27;re familiar with it and it works well with your printer.
(... now, let's see what happens to this message ... different
computer, same server ...)
cheerios ... shAf :o)
re you convert to a color
space which is more appropriate for hardcopy.
shAf :o)
de and my LS-2000 has never shown
me any "jaggies".
shAf :o)
nd negative specific
ICMs are distributed with the Nikon scanners ... they are designated
with a '-N' and '-P'. How Nikonscan incorporates them, and how useful
they are is another question.
shAf :o)
en such a stickler for definitions. When did
Dmax (and Dmin) leave its proper context ... a property of the film
only?
shAf :o)
and Dmin are absolute
terms for the densest and thinnest areas of film. "DR" and "OD", the
ability of measuring Dmax - Dmin, are also absolute terms. Dmax,
historically, has always been an absolute term ... my point being
claiming it is a relative term, no matter the context, i
quot; is a measured value, is absolute, and belongs
to film. Small point, but let's not confuse terms.
shAf :o)
RGB. Because
I do not have a reference "gamut problem" color slide, and I take no
chances, and all of my highbit scans are archived in ProphotoRGB, and
my preferred 8bit working color space is AdobeRGB.
shAf :o)
AdobeRGB, ... and in wide gamut RGB, you count 95." (These analogies
also presume you have a perfect display).
shAf :o)
anations and advice at these Bruce
Fraser's articles:
http://www.creativepro.com/author/home/0,1819,40,00.html
Bruce's "Real World PS6" (when it finally arrives) should be
anyone's CMS bible.
shAf :o)
ent with some mask
settings and crop from a disk file, I end up with a non-rotated
negative image. It didn't seem to pay attention to my wanting to flip
the file (rotate 180), my implication it was a 'device|mediatype|color
negative', and my settings for it being 'media|kodak|supra|100' (???)
shAf :o)
Ed makes us aware ...
> I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux.
> ...
questions with this version:
(1)How do I make manual focus adjustments? My understanding is it
will focus based on the selection area in the preview window.
However, if "focus" is set to 'none', and
canned it didn't turn out black, rather a grainy neutral shade of
"off white". Why, given the previously determined exposure, did this
scan not result in black?
(H? ... let me ask the question, but play with different
whitepoint and blackpoint settings)
shAf :o)
(Vuescan for Windows and Nikon LS-2000)
difference? Is it
simply not knowing what the display ICM is??
shAf :o)
shAf previously wrote ...
> I seemed to have fixed my previous problem with v.6.4.9 (...
> scanning a disk file and it coming up non-rotated and as a negative
> ...) by restarting Vuescan. (What changed shall remain a mystery,
but
> I hate it when that happens ...*smile*...)
et a good scan into PS ... and I do most of
my twiddling in PS anyway.
Is there any reason for the Vuescan displays to be darker in these
recent versions?
shAf :o)
all of you do not know exactly
how dark I am talking about. You can assume "almost really dark" ...
darker than you'd believe the difference between 1.8 and 2.2 would
cause ... but I'll play with it and get back.
If the above is the case, maybe Ed can provide us with a "preview
gamma" parameter.
shAf :o)
ether it be wide gamut or 16bits/channel, is a manmade
concoction of color definitions. There are a number of colors
described by RGB which aren't even real ... for example 0,0,255.
Nothing conceptualizes the definition of "gamut" better than "some
colors described by RGB are outside reality's gamut".
shAf :o)
mage while also working with a "working" narrower gamut
image. Both images will be displayed in their own color space ... and
if your monitor calibration is right on, you'll not be able to "see"
any difference between the two. You can be confident you can be
working with ^all^ your image information.
shAf :o)
t and prove it to yourself. Even
without regard to monitor gamut, 0-0-255 falls outside the L*a*b gamut
... which is the only color definition defined to come even close to
physical reality.
shAf :o)
> > Tony writes ...
> > >
> > > A gamut comprises a subset of colours
nition superimposed
on nature. It is much like the limitations of our own language, when
trying to make an abstract point (... is it true the French do it
better?? ...)
shAf :o)
>
>
>
> shAf writes ...
>
> > Frank writes:
> > And on my monitor, it DOES produce a rea
, I simply restarted Vuescan and it worked properly. If it
happens to you again ... rename the 'vuescan.ini' file and try it. I
am taking for granted all your settings are proper, but it never hurts
to recheck them (especially after you delete/rename the ini file.
shAf :o)
nd in fact, there are a number of
RGB values you'll never find.
shAf :o)
do not see the same colors, as
intense or not at all. The simplistic superposition of the RGB model
on color was also another realization which helped me grasp the
concepts. I just threw it in for conversation, not argument.
shAf :o)
> > Say you have a perfect camera, perfect film, and
Tony writes ...
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 10:02:16 -0800 shAf
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > ...
> > without regard to monitor gamut, 0-0-255 falls outside
> > the L*a*b gamut... which is the only color
> > definition defined to come even close to
> >
> > Nature now includes monitor phosphors :)
> >
Naturally! :o)
shAf
detail from dark areas of slides. ...
Is this something new? I suppose I've never used anything other than
1x, 4x or 16x, but I was under the impression any integer could
actually be used(?)
shAf :o)
Rob writes ...
> shAf wrote:
> >> I simply don't understand this esoteric point that
> >> 'all of the 16M colours don't exist'.
> > I mean there is a color equivelent found in the natural world
> >(anywhere, anything) for RGB=30-0-230, but
ware and the software (drivers)
associated. Which would imply RGB space is fixed by the display, and
Adobe gamma provides relative compensation.
shAf :o)
Frank writes ...
> > > shAf wrote:
>
> >
> > I am claiming you'll never be able to photograph an
> equivelent of
> > RGB=255-0-0. If you do surely let the color community know :o)
>
> You still don't understand that RGB triads are not abs
ing we may encounter???
I'd love to learn more from discussing this subject with my peers ...
I need some understanding as much as anyone else, but I do believe my
observations and questions are valid, and that I'll be able to
contribute as well as learn.
Comments in the
Tony writes ...
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:11:54 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
>
> > Which would imply RGB space is fixed by the display, and
> > Adobe gamma provides relative compensation.
> > Which would imply RGB space is fixed by the display, and
> >
r if it isn't the CIELAB (L*a*b) definition ... that
is, other Lab spaces seem (?) to be relative to L*a*b.
Next question ... can we bring this subject back to film scanners,
and their ability to capture the gamut of film (my golden fleece).
shAf :o)
MYK for pre-press output -
> eg Pantone is CMYK gamut - and CIELAB is an RGB space.
I would object to L*a*b, as any application space, simply because
it
is unintuitive. My own questions regarding it are only in the context
of
it being a absolute reference ... otherwise (practically) useless.
shAf :o)
right and vertical.
...
... and hold on to the nozzle ... you don't want it blowing off
and jetting into the mechanisms. For different angles, bend the
nozzle instead of tilting the can. Use short duration blasts and
short of full pressure.
shAf :o)
ut "dust" on
the film ... for which there are anti-static remedies ... hmmm ... for
that matter, possibly inside the scanner too, if components are
plastic ...)
shAf :o)
You really did need to know SCSI hardware to iron
things out for dependable workflow ... but once it it was working, it
seemed fine (mine anyway). And, now it is "firewire" ... I am in NO
hurry :o)
my US$0.02 ... shAf :o)
shAf (me) wrote ...
> I can't speak for the Polaroid, but the Nikon film strip holder
> hasn't changed since they introduced the LS-10 ... and it is my
> preference for the LS-2000 because it holds the film flatter than
the
> film strip feeder.
> ...
I thought
E^3 will be made available as a purchaseable upgrade for
LS-2000 scanners(?) ... or will it work with Firewire only? This
software would make the LS-2000 more valuable.
shAf :o)
why doesn't a profile-to-printer_space correct for these
"out-of-gamut" problems?? I ask because the options and permutations
are almost infinite. Do you know of a good FAQ or text which
describes these possibilities? (The primary reason I await "Real
World PS6")
shAf :o)
e laminate has it own
downside ... primarily being a hassle to remove before scanning.
shAf :o)
al version of Vuescan (...<http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html> ...),
to see if different software is a remedy. Lastly, allow us to take a
look at what you describing. Zoom in on a problem area, and crop it
to a small JPEG, and attach it to another message.
shAf :o)
RLs for us??
Would someone on this list have the Wilhehm paper
(PDF) released in December? (The Wilhelm wwwsite is under
repair, but the link to the PDF may still be intact)
thanx ... shAf :o)
our
printer ... OR, like many of us, you might consider scanning at the
LS-2000's best resolution, and make all file size and resolution
adjustments in PS.
Many of these concerns are described very well at www.scantips.com
... enjoy your LS-2000 ...
shAf :o)
, then you can create your "brightened" shadow detail
layer there. Once both these are into your 8bit image as layers, you
can "blend" to your heart's content, and both will be in perfect
registration.
shAf :o)
Michael Moore writes ...
> Shaf: I think that what the question intended is the same holy grail
I am in
> puruit of... that of being able to make TWO or more EXPOSURES at the
time the
> picture is created... in the camera... one shot for shadow, one for
mid tones,
> one for hig
ges with control
chips in them ... eliminating any possibility of 3rd party sources(?)
shAf :o)
rd capable of
driving a CRT at the resolution you want??
shAf :o)
r gamma to 2.2, the image should get darker. If you wan
t your wwweb images to appear correctly on PC/Windows (typically gamma
=2.2 to 2.5), then 2.2 is your correct PS4 working gamma. Also be sur
e to enter the "monitor setup" 'calibrate' dialog and use the "slider"
to ensure your gray patches are equal.
HTH ... shAf :o)
All you're really saying is the Epson 2000P produces amazing results
under ^your^ illumination. Others complain when they see amazing
results, and then change their minds when the print viewed with the
illuminance under which it was intended to be displayed. What would
you suggest they call it???
shAf :o)
t;scan again" versus "point Vuescan" at an already
existing "raw scan" file.
shAf :o)
mage, it will add only a few percent to
the JPEG.
Better than reading the embedded profile, would be if browsers
"assumed" sRGB and displayed it accordingly.
shAf :o)
ikons, or 'til you see how the other
manufacturers respond to the new Nikons. On paper, the mdl-4000
impressive ... but buying Nikon can be infuriating, especially a model
that hasn't been tried.
my US$0.02 ... shAf :o)
e you mean "for some scanners, but not others",
which you were fairly explicit about in your readme file(?) However,
I did understand the "long exposure pass" improved the raw scan
(LS-2000s, for example).
shAf :o)
, or "save as" with the "exclude non-image data" box checked.
shAf :o)
along this line, would be you'd need be careful when
saving a non-embedded image with PS ... that is, a simple "save" will
embed your "working space" profile unless you are careful and use the
"save as" options or the "save for web" options.
shAf :o)
101 - 200 of 375 matches
Mail list logo
