To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: venerdì 22 settembre 2000
20.28
Subject: RE: Group Scan site has posted
SS4000 scans
Derek wrote: Digital Ice can be replaced with
better handlingCouldn't agree more. But short of doing your own
developing, minilabs can wreak all sorts of damage
More objective: have one person do the adjustments
on all the raw scans.
Exactly what I concluded I should be doing, with various film types, about
9m ago :)
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner
info comparisons
... 16bit
scans are needed to get a fullest picture of scanner behaviour, but two,
that 16bit scans are just raw material, and invariably need work
involving more software and human judgement before looking half-decent.
So: arriving at useable
- Original Message -
From: "ILyons" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans
I never thought that the group scanning exercise was something
that would become the basis fo
But he uses only one single slide to make his tests and determinations.
And
the tests are done by unknown people with unknown skill levels using
undefined
parameters. They can do whatever they want with the scan and use
unknown or
different software for each unit.
Sharpness is
Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[lots of stuff snipped]
5yrs later I'm still ignorant, but at least I know I am ignorant. Did
anyone even look at these samples or wonder why the hell they were so
different when the protocol said they should be the same? Did anyone
play around with them
Derek wrote:
Digital Ice can be replaced with better handling
Couldn't agree more. But short of doing your own developing, minilabs
can wreak all sorts of damage!
I found some old negs of my wedding, still just in the paper folder
from the minilab and not even in individual sleeves! I
One very important factor in scanner testing which hasn't even been mentioned, let
alone taken into account in these tests is TEMPERATURE.
One manufacturer's data sheet states that CCD dark current doubles for every 9 degrees
Celsius rise in temperature, and this seems entirely in line with
Farzan S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a statistician, I must agree with David. Really, this is a futile
exercise and drawing conclusions based on it would be a mistake.
Oh, come on. If that's the only "right" attitude we might as
well all unsubscribe from the mailing list because any
sirius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doing testing by scanning just any peoples slide doesnt make any sense and
makes the tests in my opinion pretty worthless.
The point of scanning other people's slides was to scan a slide which was
causing
problems on one scanner to see if the same problems
Can someone please post the URL of the Group Scan site.
--
Regards
Richard
//
| @ @ --- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C _) )
--- '
__ /
You should apart from the jpegd versions include in your test uncompressed
output of significant details (blackpoint,
Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can someone please post the URL of the Group Scan site.
http://home.att.net/~arwbackup/
Regards,
Rob
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,
Melba in Korea wrote:
I have been reading up on the Nikon LS2000 and the Polaroid
Sprintscan 4000. The more I read the more confused I get. The
Nikon has low resolution compared to the Polaroid, but comes
with Digital Ice and Altamira Genuine Fractals(which is
supposed to enlarge a 35mm
I was going to sit this one out and watch what happened, but (since it's
what I use) the conclusions that are being formulated about the
Pol4000+Vuescan mostly do not accord with my experience. The picture is
emerging of a scanner which blows highlights, isn't particularly sharp,
and produces
lusions drawn.
David Hemingway
Polaroid Corporation
-Original Message-
From: jowilcox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 5:21 AM
To: Filmscanners
Subject: RE: Group Scan site has posted SS4000 scans
= Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] =
I just looked at the
David Hemingway wrote:
I am skeptical about tests using multiple operators with various
levels of knowledge and ability. Essentially lack of control.
But hopefully with testing of the same films on different machines
using vuescan helps. The protocol used relies on a single version
of
This reply is in two parts.
First a comment on David's concerns. I think by using the same
software/version AND specifying the scanning parameters the way we did, we have
largely mitigated the concern of varying operator skill level. However, there
still remains the chance of unwitting
17 matches
Mail list logo
