1) small (9-18GB) SCSI disks are close to the price of similar size IDE
disks - the SCSI disks are a little faster due to the interface.
2) large (36GB+) SCSI disks are progressively more expensive than similar
size IDE disks - but they are usually considerably faster.
3) It's quite cheap to use
>> the automatic alignment of the infrared and rgb passes will be released
in beta 9 in the next day or so.
Hi Ed,
I believe similar techniques could be used to improve/enable multi-scanning
on units with less than accurate alignment. This would certainly benefit
many scanners. Is it practical
You can try it for yourself here (30 days - $79 to buy) :
http://www.luratech.com/products/download/index_e.html#jp2pspi
I have some vague recollections of trying it some time ago. Much, much
better the JPEG but not anywhere near as good as claimed. Much slower than
jpeg during compression.
At
Anyone who is getting short of CD-R's may wish to buy some more now.
Obviously longer term. prices may fall but a short term upward blip would
seem quite likely.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/23503.html
---
A cheap way to buy a good large monitor is second-hand - nobody wants the
20"+ models (at least not in the UK as we mostly have rediculously small
houses).
I recently had the oppotunity to buy an Eizo Flexscan F78 (21") for £142
(about a 1/10th of retail).
Sadly I have nowhere to put one.
Steve
I have yet to be convinced that a LCD can match a decent CRT for image
processing work (or fast moving games).
The imaging expert at Tom's Hardware agrees:
"Graphic artists shouldn't even consider picking up one
of these gadgets"
Full review:
http://www4.tomshardware.c
Memory size has the largest single affect on processing speed.
To hit the the real comfort zone you need approx:
3 x scan size (16bit 2900dpi 35mm is 60Mb) for PS (and most other image
software) = 180MB
64Mb for PS itself
64Mb for Win 9x/ME 128 for 2000/XP
scan size + 20Mb for disk ca
I've noticed several e-mails about viruses on this e-mail list non of which
I seem to have received. On further investigation I have discovered that my
service provider Freeserve (cheap & almost cheerful) will not allow "dodgy"
attachments such as "*.exe" or "*.vbs" they just bounce. Harmless fil
It's probably the usual problem of someone (or several people) quite
influential in the organisation either not understanding the full
implications of the issue or not wanting to admit they screwed up. Therefore
they are not prepared to find the resource (ultimately money) to fix it.
They will of
- Original Message -
From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:52 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Best solution for HD and images
FOR ALL THOSE A BIT BORED WITH THIS:
You should know that not only do striped disks reduce reliabi
MTBF of a RAID-0 system (or dual cpu/memory where one unit CAN NOT continue
without the other) will always be lower than a single drive unless the
standard deviation (they never quote SD) of the MTBF is zero. i.e they all
fail simultaneously at MTBF and none before - pretty unlikely I think.
Neit
- Original Message -
From: "Ned Nurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: creating correction curves from scanned
calibration chart?
>
>
>
> >From: John Brownlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >this is nuts. loads of peo
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Geraghty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 10:53 PM
Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Best solution for HD and images
>
> IMO the higher RAID types are fine for servers, but not worth the hassle
> for home us
Appologies for the off-topic post, but I have no idea who else to ask.
On seeing one of my stitched panoramic images, the marketting manager at a
local (expensive) Hotel has asked for a quote for a shot to show a panoramic
shot of their conference centre and lake to use in postcards.
Being a com
I bought my AS4000 from digital first as they included Silverfast Ai which
at the time was only rumoured to be bundled with the scanner at some point
in the future. For an extra 10% I also got an extra 2-year warranty. I also
see that they are now including a version of Silverfast (don't know whi
- Original Message -
From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 11:56 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Hello, thanks, and more.
> One of the new features of the upcoming release of Polacolor
> Insight is the
>
You have to close and re-open the JPEG (quality 12) otherwise you won't see
the effect of the JPEG compression as PS maintains the pre-save data.
If you do try to save/close/re-open JPEG12 and do a difference with the
original PSD/BMP/TIF you will find there is a difference. Individual primary
co
Personally I like Iiyama (pronounced "eee-yama") monitors. Yet to see a bad
one (or even merely average) and they have a 3 -year ("usually" 24 hour)
swapout policy in the UK. At any particular price point IMHO there's rarely
anything significantly better.
I don't see what the big problem with the
Presumably you mean USB is 12Mbits per second.
Whilst this is much slower than firewire or ultra wide SCSI (I think
scanners only use slower versions) the impact is not that great in the grand
scheme where focussing, positioning and actual scanning are not too fast.
Yes, there is a difference, bu
Memory has the largest affect on processing speed.
To hit the the real comfort zone you need approx:
3 x scan size (16bit 4000dpi 35mm is 110Mb) for PS (and most other image
software) = 330MB
64Mb for PS itself
64Mb for Win 9x/ME 128 for 2000/XP
scan size + 20Mb for disk cache = 130MB
I know from past comments some of you have a strong preference for Gold
CD-R's.
Well I just happened across this:
http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/dg/cd/kodak_audio.html
Expensive for CD-R's but still pretty cheap archive storage.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 6:26 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Robert Meier" &l
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Meier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: NIKON LS 4000 AND D1X
> Or another way to look at it is that you just crop the inner part of a
> 35mm frame. In other words, you are
ase
equipment
> of all types by comparing published specifications. Particularly when
> dealing with scanners you can be very mis-informed.
> Regards
> David
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Greenbank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 200
me wonder what the comparison results would have
> been had 16X multi-sampling been used? I'm not sure, but it's my
impression
> that the Polaroid does not do mullti-sampling. Is that so? Thus on the
> basis of this comparison, one can't say that the Polaroid has bet
the Polaroid
> does a better job, making it the scanner of choice even without the
marvels
> of ICE. By the way, exactly what do you mean by, "I have discovered
however
> that by not
> > looking at
> >>> your images at all before scanning (I use slides) you can
Nikon.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Barbara & Martin Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Dust in Sprintscan 4000?
> Rick
>
>
> > From: "Steve Greenbank&
Rick Samco compared these two scanners here:
http://www.samcos.com/rick/equip/scannertest/ssvsed.htm
Up until I saw this I was quite keen to trade my Artixscan 4000T (SS4000
clone) for a Nikon largely for ICE. After all de-spotting is a nightmare
except on very clean images.
I have yet to find a
Unusable (to others) filenames would seem quite a reasonable step to prevent
search engines finding your images - but you will not be able to use useful
descriptive text.
I would also point out that search engines only generally index pages of
registered domains or those that you volunteer to tel
I expect 254dpi is quite common (100dpcm as used by Durst Epsilon)
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Shough, Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 3:44 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: ReSize, ReSample or ReScan ?
> Here is the pdf file that I c
I find the radius should be set to about 1.2-1.8, but if the image has been
resampled from the original this needs to be adjusted. Where an image as
been upsampled the radius needs to be larger (scaled up in proportion to the
enlargement) and where the image has been down-sampled the radius needs
> Not if royalties are abolished entirely. Everyone would be paid just once
for
> the work he does, at the time he does the work.
>
The car mechanic charges the same for each car he fixes because he has the
same work to do on each car. The lawyer is much the same as each contract is
just like on
you look Iraqi / have an Irish accent ?
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "David Gordon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Filmscanners" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT:X-ray fogging
> Steve Greenbank
Sorry to hear you have had this problem.
I always avoid the x-ray machines by wearing something with big pockets
(walkers trousers & coats are particularly good). I have never had a roll go
through an x-ray machine. Obviously there is a limit to how many you can
carry and you get some funny looks
The lack of detail in the fireman preview is clearly caused by the JPEG
compression. The larger images are very believable even if, like the others,
it is clearly overdone.
With some user control I still think it has significant potential.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECT
No I would not have taken picture 25/26. But many press photographers might
like to have the chance to capture a picture such as 25 in the case of a
fire at say an oil refinery. Obviously they would want more smoke to remain
in the picture but it would be very helpful if you can recognise where i
I never claimed their examples had any aesthetic quality, but I do think the
software appears to be pretty impressive.
Save image 25 or 26 and see if you can get anywhere near the processed
example they show you.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Winsor Crosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[
Sorry all,
This is a stray message that was meant to be sent offlist and appears to
have little relevance without the offlist message I sent earlier.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, A
There are a few dual pentium solutions with 2GB SDRAM capability. Asus who
are generally very stable have one with 4GB support. MSI also have one.
Steve
I have just noticed my lad has been on UT and you have to turn up the
brightness a lot. I have rest the brightness to it's usual point and 22
doesn't look too bad after all.
Steve
- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EM
From:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/diginews.html
The software automatically enhances digital images.
Samples of what it can do here:
http://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/retinex/pao/news/
8,10,25,26 are little short of amazing. Some of the others are less
impressive (22 in particular looks wrong) ho
I have similarly printed Casio QV3000 pics so called "super A3" (13x19) on
an Epson 1270 and don't see many normal prints to match. In general if you
are close to your subject the best digital images can be very close to the
best 35mm can produce. Lack of film grain gives it an advantage and many
> > Since it soumds like you have a decent monitor
> > I expect it has both BNC and D-Sub connector ...
>
> Yes, a Sony.
>
> > ... so you could skip the monitor or better still
> > get a 15 inch monitor and a dual head Matrox
> > graphics card.
>
> Nothing less than 20" and 1600x1200 is acceptable
ts of my working environment (such as 1800 Type 1 fonts, for
> example).
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 14:32
> Subject: Re: Getting around the firewire proble
Just like to add - get a pair of 100Mbit LAN cards with twisted pair
cross-over - it will take ages to transfer TIF files by any other means. I
would move the PS to the new machine as this is generally slow to process
large TIF files even on my 900Mhz Athlon.
Pack the new machine with ram (1GB) -
Most wedding photos are relatively small and 6Mp will be ample. They also
tend not to have any shots at infinity which is something my 3Mp camera is
less happy about - the closer you get to the subject the nearer the quality
gets to 35mm. This effect I think is due to digital quality degrading
nas
Hi Roger
A few things have occurred to me - please ignore the first 2 if you have a
Mac:
==
1) Are you using Win 9x/Me with more than 512MB ? If you are you may need
to add a line to the file c:\windows\system.
Lloyd
That sounds a bit like dodgy ASPI drivers. Have you tried any other SCSI
scanning software.
You could try ASPICHK from :
http://www.adaptec.com/worldwide/support/suppdetail.html?prodkey=EZ-SCSI_5.0
I notice that EZ-SCSI is having problems with 2000 so I don't know if this
will work. It d
s improve their
colour gamut too.
Steve
- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 2:02 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Why not sRGB ?
> So what's the colour gamut of the average human
So what's the colour gamut of the average human eye and how much variance is
there between people's perception ?
I bizarrely found during the colour blind discussion that I could change the
hue of some of the colour charts such that I (CB) could very clearly see the
correct number on the chart an
You've forgotten the dodgy help files that do little more than explain the
bare minimum and invariably miss the one vital thing you have to do to get
it to work.
There is no doubt that the possible image manipulations are very powerful
and learning how the Silverfast curves worked actually taught
> Now my problem is that I get an error from Photoshop when scanning with my
> medium format scanner. SilverFast people say I have a memory problem and
I'm
> going to have to reinstall Photoshop to cure the problem. So first, I
have
> to transfer 20 GB of data from my hard drive to CD to clean t
have just come across the following that may be of some use to people here.
Colour FAQ
http://www.inforamp.net/~poynton/ColorFAQ.html
Gamma FAQ
http://www.inforamp.net/~poynton/GammaFAQ.html
Steve
For those of you that are hoping to sell your images all including the
colour blind you may like to try the downloads here:
http://vischeck.com/showme.shtml
I have not tried any of them, but the normal and the red/green color deficit
(deuteranopia) examples sure look the same to me. (I checked i
My Iiyama is a (Diamondtron) trinitron clone too. You can always tell by the
faint horizontal lines around a third from the top and bottom of the screen.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Moreno Polloni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 10:04 PM
S
If you re-save a file PS will automatically save in the format that was
opened.
If you use "save as" and select TIFF you get the choice of compression
(none,LZW,JPEG,ZIP). Of these JPEG is lossy. None is the standard TIFF. The
other three are legal variations that may not be supported by software
- Original Message -
From: "Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:01 PM
Subject: filmscanners: OT: Color perception (was: IT8 Calibration (was: etc
> Art wrote:
>
> >I am very intrigued by the number of people on this list how have colo
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best digital archive medium for scans?
> Not to be a smart @ss, but how about film?
>
> I don't know that any of the current storage
th interest in digital scanning) would attract so many
> people who have to deal with color perception disabilities.
>
> Maybe if enough people with this condition demand more objective color
> control we'll all benefit from easier to use color management.
>
> Art
>
> Ste
> Rob, I want IT-8 calibration because I'm color blind and I want to reduce
the
> number of variables I have to deal with. In theory, any of my calibrated
> scanners can be used to scan the same slide and the final files will all
be
> nearly identical.
I'm similarly afflicted and I went through
I deliberately bought an Artixscan 4000 which came bundled with Silverfast
as opinion on this list was that Silverfast is best. Ultimately I think this
is probably true as the Silverfast interface allows you to carefully tweak
your scans to a much greater degree than with anything else provided yo
Using Vuescan with slides I have found that media type image and white
balance produce the best results most of the time. I only consider any other
options when I find I am not getting decent results. When I do try various
other combinations or scanning software I rarely produce anything better.
I have the SCSI (didn't know there was a firewire vesion) Artixscan 4000T.
Unsurprisingly it perfroms much the same as the SS4000.
The ScanWizard Pro software is very easy to use and has been completely
stable from day 1. But the results in my experience are far inferior to
Vuescan (US$40 I belie
> >I've noticed PS is slow too. Worse still it doesn't compress well
either -
> >try opening a file from Vuescan and then saving it with PS and it comes
out
> >significantly larger.
>
>
> Sorry, this doesn't sound right. For a given image,
> a given file format, and compression method, the
> file
Rather perversely the more you have the more likely you will not have a
program hogging enough memory to block the file cache from growing too big.
Upgrading to Win2K is an expensive solution if it is not necessary.
Rather perversely the more you have the more likely you will not have a
program
I've noticed PS is slow too. Worse still it doesn't compress well either -
try opening a file from Vuescan and then saving it with PS and it comes out
significantly larger.
I often don't bother with the compression anymore until I save to CD-R.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Dana Tro
> I'd also like to know if it is true as Tony suggests that aver 512MB or
RAM
> is a waste, as I was thinking of getting more RAM on the weekend.
>
I don't know as I only have 512MB but I suspect this is 99% true. That is
99% of users will see no difference because most normal applications just
d
> There are also large numbers of motherboards around which don't
> cache the memory above 512Mb (or an even lower limit). With those it may
> degrade overall performance to add more than 512 Mb.
>
I can't think of any motherboards for Pentium II/III/IV,Celerons,Athlons or
Durons for which this
- Original Message -
From: "Laurie Solomon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:25 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Scanning and memory limits in Windows
> >This is probably because you are usually using a process that is grabbing
> >sufficient memory
Two of the suggestions amount to not installing your new memory - pretty
dumb suggestions.
So I'd definitely use:
"Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum
amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less."
Further I would suggest the bigg
This is probably because you are usually using a process that is grabbing
sufficient memory to prevent the file cache getting big enough to block
every other process.
File servers are the most likely machines to be afflicted with this problem.
It may come and bite you anytime so unless your feel
I have noted that there are several people that have regular problems with
some scanning software whilst others have no problems. Some of these may be
due to a general unreliability in your system. If your image processing
software can be used without any problems this may indicate otherwise but
i
gt;
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 2:37 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000, Win98 and VCache settings
> Thanks. Good ideas here. Stan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Steve Greenbank
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2
I'd save the file after any touching up for dust etc. It's a pain to do
once - I'd hate to have to do it again.
If you are using IR dust removal this obviously doesn't apply.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "John Matturri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, Jul
Changing the VCache settings should not alter the result, only the speed at
which you receive the result :- )Except where you hit the Win9x/ME bug where
you must set a value less than 512MB if you have more physical memory than
512MB.
As this does not apply to you it suggests you have a problem e
It must be me, but I find the Vuescan interface quite good. Initially it
seemed odd but within a matter of a few hours it all seemed rather slick.
Granted it doesn't have some of the normal features found on many
manufacturers software or the ultimate flexibility of Silverfast. Pretty
windows are
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: CD from Scanner
>
>
> Steve Greenbank wrote:
> >
> > The music CDs were just one pa
CDs are
> comparable. Correct me if I'm wrong, and Steve and others will hopefully
be
> grateful.
>
> Best regardw--LRA
>
>
> >From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I wrote:
>
> > > My own personal experience is that CD-RW is more
> > > temperamental.
>
Since a few people have commented on this I think I should give a little
more detail.
I have extensively used CD-R even some dodgy cheap brands in my car 10
CD-stack. These discs are exposed to temperatures f
This is what Jack sent to me - except I've used LZW compression. I've never
seen it manage compression ratios > 20:1 -although its not surprising when
you see the image.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July
> So, the "very old" 'caveat emptor' should always be in force with ebay
> purchases.
The best one I saw was
"Playstaion 2 Box and Receipt"
Bidding started at $1 and I think there was no reserve.
There were many bids and eventually someone had the winning bid of $425. A
little over the top b
In the UK I think this scanner is available under several brand names
Jessops 1800U ,Black widow filmscan 2000 and Microtek Filmscanner 35. I
would suspect of these Microtek may be the real manufacturer.
Anyway there is a review of the Microtek version at :
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/sgreenbank/fron
Way off topic but I think this is what you are referring to:
http://www.ibm.com/news/2001/06/25.phtml
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digicams again was Re: films
I have used http://www.photobox.co.uk and found their Fuji Frontier glossy
prints (upto 10x15) match my screen even better than my Epson 1270.
I later tried A2 matte output for which the use the Durst Epsilon this
produced very neutral results but the pictures were very flat. When I
complained th
re e-mail me off list and I will write a
mini review and post a few samples and expose what I have found to be the
significant problems with the QV3000 much of which applies to many 3MP
digicams.
In general it has been much better than I ever expected and I use it much
more than my two 35mm came
Surely you should archive with the correct profile where it is known. You
can always ignore it later, but if you don't know what it is to start with
you can never get the exact archive image back.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROT
Yes the quality is great. I tend to do most of my prints on my Epson 1270
but some I do have printed on the Fuji Frontier. At the Lab I have used the
the biggest they do is 10*15 after that the Durst Epsilon (also good but
only 254dpi). The results are better than the 1270 and can even stand upto
I have an Microtek Artixscan 4000 ( mechanically identical to the Polaroid
SS4000 ). It seemed from early reviews that I might be able to scan my
slides a lot faster and in particular avoid the incredibly tedious task of
removing dust if I traded up to the Nikon. Rick then posted this link
(thanks
A Casio QV3500 + 340 MB microdrive (250 high res jpegs [and you can delete
the bad ones to make way for more]) can be had for less than the price of a
35mm camera with 28-70 zoom + half decent film scanner (Acer 2740).
On screen or in smaller prints there is little between them except the huge
de
I recently having similar problem but the dark scans were printing
reasonably OK - it turned out that Adobe Gamma was not loading during start
up. Try locating the gamma loader it should be here:
C:\Program Files\Common Files\Adobe\Calibration\Adobe Gamma Loader.exe
If your screen lightens up th
Blues do tend to come out a bit darker but I generally get an overall good
match to screen with vibrant colours. I use Adobe 1998 on a PC. Assuming
your using a PC, Ian Lyons has a good guide see:
http://www.rgbnet.co.uk/ilyons/media_profiles/media_print_1.htm
basically assuming you have photosh
riginal Message -----
From: "Steve Greenbank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: cd making question
> On windows
>
> Set up a html file in the root directory to show the files (assume it is
>
- Original Message -
From: "Lynn Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: what defines this quality?
> What's more likely to happen, is a
> jump in technology, maybe a digital screen that fits into a thin frame on
On windows
Set up a html file in the root directory to show the files (assume it is
called index.html for this example) then create an "autorun.inf" file in the
root directory of the CD with the following lines:
[autorun]
OPEN=start.exe index.html
This will automatically start explorer with th
I was considering trading up from my Artixscan 4000 (SS4000 clone) to a
Nikon because I'm sick of removing dust specks, the Nikon was said to be
sharper with better shadow performance and faster, not to mention GEM and
ROC.
In reality Rick's sample do show that Nikon generally has the best shadow
Following on from Tony's method here's mine - under a new topic as it has
nothing to do with Polaroid 120s. I don't think I'm too good at the actual
image processing side so I'm going to brush over a lot of that and describe
the overall workflow.
I am aiming to have scans of anything vaguely usef
Check on some of the better known camera sales sites (check for address in a
camera mag)
eg.
http://www.jessops.com
http://www.digitalfirst.co.uk (they do for extra 10% of purchase 3 year
warranty - not tried using one so I don't know how easy it is to claim)
and possibly some of the bigger compu
> This doesn't always work in all systems. With W98SE here it never does, I
> have to restart, although with W95 it was fine.
Works evertytime on my Win98SE with Artixscan 4000T. I suspect there are a
host of issues that allow this to work or not.
Some combinations of hardare and software work
On a PC it may be worth trying regedit to fool the software. It should be
noted that regedit can completely screw your machine. Before starting save a
copy!
The relevant part is "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Enum\SCSI". If someone supplies you
with the relevant information for the scanner your trying to emu
I have the Artixscan 4000T (same as SS4000) and dust is a big problem. The
best solution is to put the film through the scanner before you do anything
else with it. I currently have a box of slides that I have had for over a
week and haven't even opened them because I want to take the lid off and
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
