"Raphael Bustin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tried it on my 8000 when I first got it,
> and it was a no-go. Had a few emails
> back and forth with Ed Hamrick, and that
> was the last of it. Ed was in need of some
> documentation from Nikon.
Bummer. In the past he's been able to do something
I've seen this too rafe. In fact, it seem to be more distinct in the print
than on the screen.
Lawrence
> What worries me a bit is that I've had cases where the
> banding shows up on the (Epson) print, but is almost invisible
> on the screen. And no, I'm not confusing it with the micro-
> ban
I was proceeding from the thought that the band was
the result of 'accumulated bits' (my own term, just
made up) but someone posted a very knowledgeable note
that pretty much put the kibosh on my theory. I'm just
an armchair coder, and defer to the explanation of why
my suggestion probably was wro
> It
> sounds like the
> samples aren't completely being reset to zero before another sample is
> taken.
>
> Pat
I am curious exactly what you mean by that? Where are the samples not being
reset to 0?
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Robert Meier wrote:
> Unfortunately, I do not have the email with the scan
> anymore but it seemed to me that the banding happens
> at constant pixel spacing. Therefore, I do not believe
> that it is a problem with the CCD itself because it's
> quite unlikely that the senso
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Rob Geraghty wrote:
> Lawrence wrote:
> >settings. Heres what I have discovered. If I make individual adjustments
> >to the RGB channels in Nikonscan the banding appears.
>
> Does the banding occur in Vuescan output?
Vuescan, the cure for what ails you.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Lawrence Smith wrote:
> Well, just when you think you've made progress the scanner fools you. On
> further testing I started getting bands without making any adjustments.
> This is one strange machine. One thing is consistent however, the banding
> is much worse at 16x.
--- Pat Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a wild-ass guess, but maybe memory at the
> byte level isn't being
> accessed or allocated or released properly, and what
> appears as a band is
> the result of regular 'overflows'.
I don't think that is the problem. If there would be
overflow y
>I didn't think vuescan supports this scanner yet..
Pity - it would be a useful comparison. Maybe someone should send Ed a
SCSI command dump?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
This makes it sound more like a software issue. I would further bet that the
number of pixels between band peaks is evenly divisible by 8. It also makes
me think I was on the right track with my earlier guess. It sounds like the
samples aren't completely being reset to zero before another sample i
Well, just when you think you've made progress the scanner fools you. On
further testing I started getting bands without making any adjustments.
This is one strange machine. One thing is consistent however, the banding
is much worse at 16x. at 1x it is essentially invisible.
Lawrence
>
> I've
I didn't think vuescan supports this scanner yet..
Lawrence
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:43 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmsca
Lawrence wrote:
>settings. Heres what I have discovered. If I make individual adjustments
>to the RGB channels in Nikonscan the banding appears.
Does the banding occur in Vuescan output?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
This is a wild-ass guess, but maybe memory at the byte level isn't being
accessed or allocated or released properly, and what appears as a band is
the result of regular 'overflows'.
- Original Message -
From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I've found something out. Thanks
> I've found something out. Thanks to Howard Slavitt who suggested
> to me that
> the issue might actually be with the profile conversion I tried
> some various
> settings. Heres what I have discovered. If I make individual adjustments
> to the RGB channels in Nikonscan the banding appears. If
]]On Behalf Of rafeb
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 10:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: filmscanners: Scratch the Gear Teeth Theory
>
>
>
> A quick measurement of those "teeth" on the 8000 ED
> film holders shows 8 teeth per inch (0.125" pitch.)
>
A quick measurement of those "teeth" on the 8000 ED
film holders shows 8 teeth per inch (0.125" pitch.)
OTOH, the banding that I've seen has a period (width)
of about 30-35 pixels, which is well under 0.01" at 4000 dpi.
Scratch that theory.
rafe b.
17 matches
Mail list logo
