as good as that worked, using a decent flatbed scanner would probably be even better! scanners can be super critical sharp too.
JC O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom" - Thomas Jefferson -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Waller Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7:49 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: K20D as Scanner I had the need for prints from some 50 year old B+W family pictures that I didn't have the negs for. I don't have a flat bed scanner & decided to shoot them with my K20D & my 200mm f4.0 ED Macro. I shot them using a tripod, making sure I was perpendicular to the image plane, using available light & being mindful to eliminate glare off the originals. I shot raw, ran them thru CS2 (including applying a small amount of unsharp mask) & printed them (slightly larger than the original image) on my 12 year old Epson Stylus Photo printer. The results are simply astounding ! Its hard to believe the final results came from the 50 year old original - much clearer and sharper. I seriously doubt if wet prints off the original negs would even come close to the digitally produced images. FYI Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
