> > The pixel values (for which the range of is the > > theoretically highest Dmax for the scanner) > > are relative to each other, not absolute, ... > Correct ... the "pixel values" associated with measuring Dmax may be > relative ... but "Dmax" is a measured value, is absolute, and belongs > to film. Small point, but let's not confuse terms. The scanner manufacturers use Dmax as a specification item, which you said they didn't, but they do. We were talking about that, not a wit about film. We were talking about how many bits correspond to the different values of Dmax (amongst many other things), and that is NOT measured. I don't know what your point is, but I suggest you go read the thread, and if you take issue with the term "Dmax" used with a scanner, than take it up with the scanner manufacturers.
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Rob Geraghty
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? John D. Horton
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? shAf
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? shAf
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? shAf
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Julian Robinson
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Bob Shomler
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Julian Robinson
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
- filmscanners: Vuescan 6.4.8 problems with Canosca... Richard
- Re: filmscanners: Vuescan 6.4.8 problems with Can... Dean Brown
- RE: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits? Tony Sleep
