On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 23:20:32 -0500 SKID Photography ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
If you claim that
'scans', are not of the grain of the film, I don't understand where the
scanner is getting it's information
from.
For once I agree with Austin :-)
The scanner sees only luminance and
Austin,
I guess we are back to my original disclaimer about not being
able to discuss this. If you claim that
'scans', are not of the grain of the film, I don't understand
where the scanner is getting it's information
from.
Harvey,
You are obviously not understanding what I am saying. A
Todd Flashner wrote:
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! ;-)
What I was trying to say was that a scan of a negative (let's say BW) *is* a scan of
its grain. If the
scanner can't get the
Harvey,
What I was trying to say was that a scan of a negative (let's say
BW) *is* a scan of its grain. If the
scanner can't get the grain sharply rendered then it can't make a
sharp scan.
You can get sharp scans and NOT scan down to the film grain. In fact,
most scanners do not resolve
Austin,
I guess we are back to my original disclaimer about not being able to discuss this.
If you claim that
'scans', are not of the grain of the film, I don't understand where the scanner is
getting it's information
from.
If you insist that in this field (photography) a 'Holga' image is
Hi Harvey,
HI scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all. I also shoot
with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film, so I can
control the
quality of the development.
Aren't 'sharp' images on film a different issue than sharp scans?
Yes, but your scans won't
Austin writes ...
And aren't higher bit level scans sharper than lower bit
ones?
No. In fact, they would be softer, since there are more
tonal levels. Sharpness is really nothing but contrast,
as in difference in tonal values.
I don't agree!! What you are implying is ... because
Austin writes ...
And aren't higher bit level scans sharper than lower bit
ones?
No. In fact, they would be softer, since there are more
tonal levels. Sharpness is really nothing but contrast,
as in difference in tonal values.
I don't agree!! What you are implying is
Austin Franklin wrote:
Hi Harvey,
HI scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all. I also shoot
with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film, so I can
control the
quality of the development.
Aren't 'sharp' images on film a different issue than sharp
Harvey,
So, I still maintain, that in *this* discussion, the sharpness of
the original has no bearing on the need to
sharpen scans for printing.
For YOUR purposes, if you want to shoot a Holga and scan grain, that's
fine...but most people 1) don't do that and 2) don't do that...so how is
Austin,
After reading your reply, I see no point in continuing this discussion.
Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC
Harvey,
So, I still maintain, that in *this* discussion, the sharpness of
the original has no bearing on the need to
sharpen scans for printing.
For
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
I'm curious to know if those who scan and print
35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above --typically sharpen their
scanned images before printing. Also, do drum scans require less
sharpening?
Chris Hargens
Hi Chris,
I'm curious to know if those who scan and print 35mm negs --using a 3600
dpi
scanner and above -- typically sharpen their scanned images before
printing.
I scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all. I also shoot with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film,
Austin Franklin wrote:
HI scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all. I also shoot with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film, so I can control the
quality of the development.
Aren't 'sharp' images on film a different issue than sharp scans?
And aren't higher bit
, December 06, 2001 3:25
AM
Subject: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned
images for printing
I'm curious to know if those who scan and print
35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above --typically sharpen their
scanned images before printing. Also, do drum scans require less
:
Chris Hargens
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001
3:25 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Sharpening
scanned images for printing
I'm curious to know if those who
scan and print 35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above -- typically
sharpen their scanned images before printing. Also
17 matches
Mail list logo
