I suggest you look for any detail removed with Digital ICE because there
will probably not be any detail removed. The reason the image may look
less sharp is because the eye is being tricked by the surface defects
(dust, scratches, etc.). There shouldn't be any residual silver in C-41
processed
on 11/9/04 2:46 AM, Chris Aitken at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
Further to my previous messages I have obtained a Scan Dual I on trial. I
have tried it with the Vuescan trial version (and also the Minolta drivers -
so this must be a later model that works on XP).
Although my negatives
Chris Aitken wrote:
Hi All,
Further to my previous messages I have obtained a Scan Dual I on trial. I
have tried it with the Vuescan trial version (and also the Minolta drivers -
so this must be a later model that works on XP).
As an alternative to blasting air at the negative before
]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Software dust removal
Chris Aitken wrote:
Hi All,
Further to my previous messages I have obtained a Scan Dual I on trial. I
have tried it with the Vuescan trial version (and also the Minolta
drivers -
so this must be a later model that works on XP
May I also recommend Edwal anti-static film cleaner. My computer store
sells very soft disposable material for cleaning CD's/DVDs, and combined
with Edwal's anti-static cleaner, it is easy to reduce the amount of dust to
a minimum - near zero. I've been using Edwal in tandem with the
From: David J. Littleboy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My basic take is that high-res film scans need noise reduction, and
NeatImage does a good job.
How does it compare with using GEM in Nikonscan? I find GEM at 2 to be very
effective for current E200 films,. and GEM at 3 for Provia400.
What would
]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Neat Image with Nikon scanners?
From: David J. Littleboy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What would Neatimage do that GEM doesn't?
Ed Verkaik
--
--
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED
From: Les Berkley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NI allows you to create profiles for devices, emulsions, etc, and gives you
controls over color noise, luminance etc.
Another advantage of NeatImage is that (since you store the unmodified scan)
you get to try again if you don't like the results. GEM
on 11/2/04 4:40 AM, Al Bond at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Berry Ives wrote:
It seems like I have
heard of grain aliasing issues, or somesuch. I am printing at 1440
dpi on watercolor paper with an Epson 2200.
A couple of points. Firstly, the Elite 5400 has a grain disolver feature
which
From: Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since there is now a Mac version of the Neat Image plugin, I have been
looking at their product info page
http://www.neatimage.com/mac/index.html
They don't provide a noise profile for the Nikon film scanners. I would be
interested in reading
I scan by LS-40.
Since NI evaluation and purchase I found one a little bit more
effective for grain smoothing then the GEM. Slightly smoother
performance and a touch less impact on sharpness.
However, if detail sharpness is critical, it may still have certain
impact on one. I figured for my uses
Berry Ives wrote:
I am getting PS-CS to replace PS 5 LE and Elements.
To support PS-CS, I am moving from Mac OS 9.1 to OS 10.3. I have also
decided to replace my Mac G4 with a G5.
I have been using a Minolta Scan Dual II, which does not support OS 10, so I
am considering the Scan Dual IV.
Brad Davis wrote:
Hi,
I'm aware that this is about scanners, but sometime ago, there were some
comments regarding monitors. I have suddenly found that I am in need of a
new one (black is now a dark gray). I recall some comment that LCD flat
screens were not ready for prime time - but I am not
Tomek,
I'm a bit dissappointed by the number of comments as I thought that more
people would be able to give an advice on what the options are for MF film
quality scanning at the price of about 1000-1200 $.
If you are a bit technically inclined, I would highly recommend a
Leafscan45. For
Tomek,
I've gotten good results from the Epson 2450 with 645 and 6x6, have
recently upgraded to the 4870 and am quite happy.
Photo-i http://www.photo-i.co.uk/ has Canon's description of the 9950F
flatbed, which replaces their dedicated film scanners. The machine
comes with holders for 120 and
Hi,
I did have a Minolta Multi, the predecessor of Multi II. I was satisfied with
the Multi which I mostly used with Ed Hamricks Vuescan. I was never really
satisfied with Minolta's own software.
Later upgraded to a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro, the latter being a
4800/3200 PPI (135/120)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I did have a Minolta Multi, the predecessor of Multi II. I was satisfied
with
the Multi which I mostly used with Ed Hamricks Vuescan. I was never really
satisfied with Minolta's own software.
Erik,
I now search for info on the Multi family of scanners. There was a time
I have seen a few cases where the original product has been literally
made into a mold for a knock-off. And in other cases, it appears an off
shore company has bought or otherwise acquired the old molds or dies
from a product, probably after the original manufacturer feels they are
beyond their
Arthur Entlich wrote:
Although I won't go as far as to say all cables are made the same or by
only a few sources, I will say that most off branded cables are made
to similar construction specifications and are often from the same
off-shore locations.
Also, many companies that make low-cost
Brad Davis wrote:
I intentionally left out one datum that supports a mobo problem. His
sound
system is not working correctly, it isn't stereo, he only has one
channel
It's dead tedious trying to pin these things down, but those 3.5mm stereo
jack sockets are awful things - it's easy to lose
Sorry for the top posting.
The sleeves that film comes back from processing in Japan fit two 6x7 frames
or three 645 frames at a time. Since these are a standard ISO size (A4),
they were being quite reasonable. (Cheap shot against premodern countries
still using 16th century measurement systems.)
I have a similar problem with my pages for my XPAN film and holders
for my Imacon.
My pages need to have things in groups of three.
What I do is cut the film that I want to scan into a two and a one
and then load the single frame into the opposite side of the sleeve.
--- David J. Littleboy
for a higher price
tag but not necessarily higher quality.
Regards to all,
Tom Maugham
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Julian Vrieslander
Sent: October 20, 2004 4:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Interferences
On 10
You didn't mention what he is scanning... transmissive or reflective.
If he is scanning something like a satin finish semi-glossy photo, I
have seen some scanners pick up sparkles or dots or shadows with
certain irregular surfaces. It does look like noise. Also, does he have
the scanner software
One more thought... you said this guy was an electrician?
Could it be possible he wired his own house?
Bad grounding, dirty power due to bad connections at the outlets,
unbalanced circuit box, interference pick up due to incorrectly wired
outlet (polarization mixed up?).
I know this sounds a
Hi Tony, hi all, thanks for inputs
I believe we all have some good tagliatelle recipes!
OK, firewire, USB and video cables are (sometimes) shielded
but most AC cables are not, they easily can catch electromagnetic
interferences, the AC power itself carries a lot of interferences :
rings,
As long as we are schmoozing about cables, I will put in a reminder to be
wary of cheap Firewire cables. A few months ago, I was having some
intermittent problems with my Nikon LS-4000. The source turned out to be a
3m FW cable that I had installed, so that I could move the scanner to a
table
It's not moire, is it? What is he scanning?
Have him try a different scanning program - free trial of Vuescan. He can
perhaps narrow it down to a hardware vs. a software problem.
http://www.hamrick.com/
Maris
Brad Davis wrote:
Hi,
My electrician discovered that I know a little about
, October 20, 2004 2:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Interferences
As long as we are schmoozing about cables, I will put in a
reminder to be wary of cheap Firewire cables. A few months
ago, I was having some intermittent problems with my Nikon
LS-4000. The source
On 10/20/04 12:50 PM, Kris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian, while I don't disagree with the need to buy good shielded cables, I
would suggest that there are many suppliers that are more cost effective
than the cable that Apple sells.
There's always the possibility that the specific cable you
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Julian Vrieslander
Sent: October 20, 2004 4:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Interferences
On 10/20/04 12:50 PM, Kris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julian, while I don't disagree with the need to buy good
Brad Davis wrote:
I wouldn't expect the interface to put in such an even (if random)
dot pattern. I have no idea how XP might be at fault, but the one thing
that would seem to be common is the XP driver for USB(12).
No such problems here with XP USB2 and scanners or anything else. If he's
Tony,
You've given me the other answer that I had come up with (and the one I was
hoping was wrong). First, he is now running USB2 from an add on board in a
PCI slot, so it seems unlikely that the problem is the hardware interface -
although, as you say, there are some situations where the
AFAIK, VueScan works by using low-level calls to the scanner's interface,
and is independent of the OEM driver software. Ancient SCSI scanners work
perfectly on my XP box (with the ASPI layer installed).
Les
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
results. I
paid less than $300US for the unit with the tranny head (both new) on
ebay...
Les
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 10:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Cheapo
Hi All
Thought I'd post the solution to the problem of my Coolscan stopping part
way through a batch scan (anywhere between 6-20 out of 50 scans would
complete before an error message saying that power was off to the scanner
would appear and then hang.)
It appears that the USB 2.0 PCI card I
Two thoughts:
25 pins on the computer and 50 pins on the device was the standard SCSI configuration
for
years. 25-to-50 cables are probably more common than 50-to-50 cables. The extra 25
lines
are just grounds (individually paired to each data line) and only really need to be
connected at one
It got through.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been trying to sent a posting to the list but it doesn't appear
and I
don't get any admin/error messages. This test is just to see if a
message with different text fares any better!
Al Bond
Just so you know, your message was distributed - that is, I got it.
Brad
On 22/9/04 14:22, Al Bond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been trying to sent a posting to the list but it doesn't appear and I
don't get any admin/error messages. This test is just to see if a
message with different
Laurie,
This site: www.ncf.carleton.ca/~aa571/aspi.htm has the FTP URL
addresses for Adaptec.
The Radified web site http://aspi.radified.com/ offers this bit of
jargon: The term 'ASPI' is an acronym that stands for: Advanced SCSI
Programming Interface. All the following terms are synonymous:
Bernie Kubiak wrote:
All this might not be necessary if MS learned to play well with others!
grin
Bernie
And when might that be? :)
Jim
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe
All this might not be necessary if MS learned to play well with
others! grin
MS does play well with others; but only if it can be boss. :-)
Unfortunately, this seems to be a common failing of the whole industry.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
installed
Laurie,
This site:
Bernie and Laurie,
I have updated the ASPI files from the links Bernie provided. After
reboot I turned on the Epson scanner and the computer recognized it
immediately - no reinstallation of the drivers. I will try it again
tomorrow, after I use the SprintScan 120 and the card reader. If it
I have had problems trying to run two scanners off a SCSI card wherein one
of the scanners insisted that it be loaded first or else it would not load.
Others have said that they have run into a similar thing with a SCI card
where one of the scanners insisted on being given a specific ID assignment
Which service pack? I've occasionaly had this happen on my XP machine
and after a while I just kept the driver in a known spot on the c-drive
so that I could have it find it when it asked. No need to pull out the
CD again and again.
- John
James L. Sims wrote:
I am having a problem with my
Laurie,
I almost always have only one scanner turned on. I have each USB device
in its own port - Epson scanner, Epson printer, trackball, and
multi-card reader (that takes up two ports). I have tried switching
ports (a suggestion made by Epson). What's strange is that the only
device drivers
John,
I have SP4 installed along with all the Critical updates. Also, I've
installed a suggested fix for failures to mount a drive.
Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which service pack? I've occasionaly had this happen on my XP machine and after a
while I just kept the driver in a known spot on
Jim,
I'd try posting your question on the on the Windows support groups
Microsoft sponsors. The problem with the shutdown sequence suggests
that something needs fixing with the OS and that in turn should help
with the scanner driver situation. FWIW, I've not had problems with
Epson scanner
Thanks, Bernie. I think I posted this problem on a Microsoft monitored
newsgroup a while back but the response didn't seem to fit the issues
I'm having. I'll give it another try.
Jim
Bernie Kubiak wrote:
Jim,
I'd try posting your question on the on the Windows support groups
Microsoft
and is reverting to hybernation rather than shut
down.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James L. Sims
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 11:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson scanner drivers will not stay
installed
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
What's strange is that the only device drivers that go away are the Epson scanner
drivers.
This makes me think the problem is that the scanner is basically a SCSI based scanner
which uses a USB port but feeds to a SCSI driver. The driver that goes away may be
the
Yes. That doesn't seem to do any good, Laurie. However, In trying
this again to be sure, I decided to turn off the scanner and then
turn it back on. On the third try it recognized it. One other thing
I should point out. When I first turn on the scanner, this is after
the computer has
Rob,
Many thanks for that picture; I can see now how it works. Should be great
for helping with scanning old Kodachromes in card mounts which are prone to
getting taken in two at a time and jamming according to the Nikon manual.
Bob frost.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rob,
The SF200 works with the LS2000 and LS4000ED, but the 5000 has a different
version - SF210 I believe.
I've just ordered a SF200 for my 4000, so I'm interested in your fix for
jamming. Can you give more details - I can't quite envisage it at the
moment, despite looking at the diagrams in the
1) Works with LS-4000
Chris Street
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 16 September 2004 12:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Nikon Slide feeders SF 200 - which models does it
fit now?
1) Does anyone
Frank Mullins wrote:
..., my slide collection consists of over 10,000 slides. While
I am
sure I will choose not to digitize all of them, a bulk loader is a
major
consideration. Thanks, for bringing this to my attention. To scan
these one
at a time would take hundreds, if not thousands, of
At 3:55 PM +1000 9/14/04, Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote:
I have read several reports from people who have used older models of Nikon
slide feeders. As I recall, they found the feeders were very reliable with
plastic slide mounts.
With card mounts there was a risk that the feeder would try to
gobble
I notice on the Minolta compatibility chart, the following footnotes
regarding use of the Scan Dual IV with Mac OS-X:
*3:You must be logged on as an administrator to complete the driver
installation.
*4:The Mac OS X plug-in cannot be used with applications that are not OS X
native.
Since it is
Carlisle,
Thanks for amplifying my answer, yours is so much clearer and sensible. I
recognize that I was assuming that everyone knows Unix to some degree, even
though I also know that isn't true.
Brad
Berry,
To amplify Brad's answer:
When you first set up your Mac under OSX, you create
Brad,
My pleasure!
I only know enough Unix to be dangerous...but I *do* know macs!
8*)
Carlisle
Carlisle,
Thanks for amplifying my answer, yours is so much clearer and sensible. I
recognize that I was assuming that everyone knows Unix to some degree, even
though I also know that isn't
Art and Carlisle,
Thank you both for your response to my question concerning the Coolscan V vs
the Super Coolscan 5000.
Carlisle, my slide collection consists of over 10,000 slides. While I am
sure I will choose not to digitize all of them, a bulk loader is a major
consideration. Thanks, for
I can only answer half your question, but I have some idea of the
changes that Minolta made between the two.
In it's time, the Minolta SD2 was considered good value, however, it was
not without its flaws. They had a problem with quality control which
led to what I coined lazy sensors which meant
on 9/11/04 6:43 AM, Arthur Entlich at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can only answer half your question, but I have some idea of the
changes that Minolta made between the two.
In it's time, the Minolta SD2 was considered good value, however, it was
not without its flaws. They had a problem with
I'm only a neophyte at this but I never noticed any of the problems
mentioned with my SD2. I am very happy with it for the price. It
sounds like significant improvements have been made though, so the SD4
sounds like the better deal.
-- al
, September 11, 2004 8:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Scan Dual IV vs Scan Dual II
Berry Ives wrote: Okay, does anyone have experience on both the
Minolta SD2 and SD4? If so, please share that with me. I've read the
specs already.
I don't usually do Me
Dear folks,
I've been a member of this mailing list for years and it's been an
indispensable resource.
I still have many thousands of slide and negatives to be scanned and I'm
in the market for a new scanner.
Film scanning is not a dead letter, nor is it even moribund. There are
oceans and
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Preston, I have to wonder if time were money
if you would actually save a whole lot by using dICE since using it
often slows down the scan speed a great deal. If one cleaned one's film
and dust out of the scanner, would one have to spend more than a minimal
amount of time
Preston,
At one time I had all my color negatives ( and BW, I use XP2) done at one
hour labs and I spent a lot of time spotting - I don't like the dust removal
programs (I've tried various instances) as it reduces the sharpness of the
image - I already feel that I am not able to truly use the
James L. Sims wrote:
WELCOME BACK, ART!!! I thought you'd died! At my age it's getting to
be a real worry.
Gee Jim,
Thanks... I think ;-)
I'm sure some people may well wish I had... but the rumors of my demise
have been greatly exaggerated (like dust and grain on Nikon scanners?).
Just
Brad Davis wrote:
In part, because I much enjoyed reading the list when there was more
activity, I asked if there was a way to get it moving again.
You seem to have done just that:)
Asking questions, or putting up points/observations for debate will do it.
Regards
Tony Sleep -
Hi Frank,
There are a couple of questions to ask in terms of these specifications.
A/D bit conversion is correlated to dynamic range. In theory, a higher
bit depth in the conversion, should result in a better (higher) dynamic
range. But the truth is, it isn't that simple, and the quoted
Oh, is that what those overly ornate doors were all about... no wonder
everyone thinks I died, I've been missing all the signs...
I guess that's what happens when you don't leave your computer often enough.
Art
Tony Sleep wrote:
James L. Sims wrote:
WELCOME BACK, ART!!! I thought you'd
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
But if your analysis is correct and traffic is negligable because most of
the knowledgable users have adequate knowledge and are using their older
models of scanner and not keeping up with the newer models, then
eventually
there will not be a group of informed
Brad Davis wrote:
As to what kind of list I would like in addition - I feel that I am most
behind the curve on various programs for image processing. I use
Photoshop
CS, and while I find it very useful, I keep coming across comments that
this
or that software does some things (even many
Tony,
I think we are on the same page; and I concur with many of your points. The
list has for the most part had balance and been self correcting without
heavy handed intervention on your part. The arrow of time typically goes
in a linear fashion; but time may not have that characteristic any
On 9/8/04 10:30 PM, Brad Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, that makes sense to me too - would you suggest what we might
address best here? Scanners seem about done as a topic - they'll be around
for a while, but they are more like appliances than specialized equipment
and a lot of the
With a slide copier on the front of your digital camera, who needs a
scanner?
Bob Frost.
- Original Message -
From: Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sometime in the next year, I hope to acquire a decent DSLR. Perhaps the
ideal list focus for me would be crusty old film
From: Bob Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks:
With a slide copier on the front of your digital camera,
who needs a scanner?
Medium and large format users.
David J. Littleboy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tokyo, Japan
Hi Bob,
With a slide copier on the front of your digital camera, who needs a
scanner?
Er, people who want high(er) quality scans?
Regards,
Austin
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
At 9:40 AM -0400 9/9/04, Frank Lila Mullins wrote:
I am in the process of purchasing my first film scanner. Although, I will,
at times, use the scanner to make 8 x 10 or larger prints, my primary goal
is to convert my 35mm slide collection to digital. At present, am tending
toward the Nikon
A lurker adds his $0.02:
I've not been a member for long, having joined within the last year
in preparation for purchasing a scanner to archive an extensive slide
collection.
Personally, I hadn't realized that the list even *needed* a revival.
This is an *incredibly* good list, because the junk
My two cents is that the value of this list is its expertise
in film scanners. It's a film scanner group, not a group that
happens to talk about film scanners. If one just wanted the
group to be more talkative for the group's sake, we could just
start talking about politics or religion and have
, 2004 12:31 AM
To: Clark Guy
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
Jules,
Actually, that makes sense to me too - would you suggest what we might
address best here? Scanners seem about done as a topic - they'll be around
for a while, but they are more like appliances than specialized
Message-
From: Arthur Entlich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 4:16 AM
To: Clark Guy
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
Since everyone knows that what really keeps a list active is a good bit of
controversy, I will take responsibility for the list having
James L. Sims wrote:
WELCOME BACK, ART!!! I thought you'd died! At my age it's getting to
be a real worry.
He has. I have. You have. Didn't you see the pearly gates on the way in?
Regards
Tony Sleep - http://www.halftone.co.uk
Tony Sleep wrote:
He has. I have. You have. Didn't you see the pearly gates on the way in?
Geesh! And I thought I was dreamin'
Jim
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe
With a slide copier on the front of your digital camera, who needs a
scanner?
hm.
me, and quite a few others. :)
In short digital cameras don't provide anywhere near the depth and detail
that a film scanner can with slides. Not even a medium format scanning back
IMHO can come close to what a
Carlisle Landel wrote:
This is an *incredibly* good list, because the junk to content ratio
is vanishingly close to zero. So what if there are long periods of
silence? As far as I've been able to see, if somebody has a
question, it is answered quickly *and* authoritatively. If somebody
Tony,
Thanks for your response. The past day or so has been an education for me.
Initially, my concern was fueled by the fact that I needed some information
(cleaning my Polaroid SS4000) and the concern that it might not have been
available if I waited a little longer- that the list might have
2. It's still useful to have a dedicated reference forum in one place, for
as long as there are filmscanners around. Even if traffic is negligible, it
may be tomorrow that any of us needs the conduit to the expertise of
others.
But if your analysis is correct and traffic is negligable because
Davis
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 7:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: List future
Tony,
Thanks for your response. The past day or so has been an education for me.
Initially, my concern was fueled by the fact that I needed some information
(cleaning my Polaroid SS4000
I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has
helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I know,
scanners are still improving. Many of the members on this list, and
they're too numerous to name, have been of invaluable assistance to me.
I agree with
To all:
I will add my support to revive this list. Unlike many of you, I recently
joined in hopes of getting some good ideas to support the purchase of a
filmscanner in my business. I have been disappointed in the very few
messages that have come across, so much so I haven't even introduced
Maybe, the name of the group should be changed to Image Capturing and
Digitalization Techniques. :-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has
helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I
know, scanners are still
Laurie,
Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have
it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing.
We don't have to duplicate Phil Askey, but I would love to know what actual
experience is with different digital cameras - is the canon Mark II really
that
On 9/8/04 4:32 PM, Brad Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have
it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing.
I have not been a conspicuous presence on this list, mostly lurking for a
couple of years. I have
Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of
them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas,
including actual practice - are still around.
Flattery will get you everywhere you smooth talker you; but on these sorts
of lists flattery will only get you in
Jules,
Actually, that makes sense to me too - would you suggest what we might
address best here? Scanners seem about done as a topic - they'll be around
for a while, but they are more like appliances than specialized equipment
and a lot of the issues have been addressed. I would like to keep
Date sent: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:13:02 -0700
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Ed Lusby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[filmscanners] Re: Raw files in Vuescan
I believe incorrect cropping can lead
Myles,
You're right, the colors would not be affected, but, as I said before, I
believe the exposure times could be affected, if the black/white strip is
of significant size. I don't know what significant size is exactly,
that' why I suggested you look for clipping in highlights and loss of
701 - 800 of 5371 matches
Mail list logo
