[filmscanners] Re: [filmscanners_Digest] filmscanners Digest for Thu 18 Sep, 2003
Hi Tony, I've hung in there about as long as I can. This list has disintegrated to the point that for every one thing I learn, I must endure the endless atom splitting, word parsing, "Nth degree" discussion and clutter that egos bring. Then comes the "I'm right, you're an idiot" tone and it goes downhill from there. There are some smart people on this list. Just ask them. This is human nature, I suppose, as many lists have had a similar fate. I belong to a number of lists but none reaches this level of pontificating discourse. Another e-group to which I subscribe is on the Morgan sports car. It has over 800 members internationally, a lot of them very active and is chock full of very knowledgeable people who want to share their wisdom and do so with humor, civility and respect. There is no such thing as a stupid question and the "community" is the better for it. The level of expertise of all things Morgan is exceeded only by their broad experience in many other things. One dimensional they are not. Spirited, lively discussion and debate is the norm, but done in a way that perpetuates it's existence. It's grown from day one for the last two years. Your original concept was much appreciated. You've always been fair and a gentleman and your skills as a photographer and a caring moderator are tops. It's too bad that the list has not been the same to you. I'll be unsubscribing (a separate request will be made). Should this essential topical listserv ever find it's way out of it's egocentricity, please let me know. I'd like to continue getting good information without the dysfunction. Best Regards, Steve Dreiseszun Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
Its the "Preview Hist" and "Scan Hist" tabs at the top of the right hand panel. At 11:31 PM 9/17/2003, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: >I would welcome any suggestins >as to the location of the comand that produces a visual histogram. -- Clive http://clive.moss.net Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Hi Laurie, > >But...here's the rub. If you get the setpoints and tonal corrections > >reasonably close in the scanner driver, keep in mind, this is all done > using > >high bit data... it's just how scanners work...it completely moots the > >discussion of 16 vs 8 bit files...as there would be no need to do large > >tonal moves post scanning. > > The other shoe? > > First, it assumes that the software being used allows for this; Yes, I understand that...and have been told that some software doesn't have decent tools, like a decent setpoint tool, and a decent curve tool, and a histogram display... > but granting > that it does for purposes of argument, it may completely moot the > discussion > for you but not for others for a number of reasons that they are trying to > tell you but while you are listening you are not hearing. I think you're mistaken about that. The discussion is about 8 bit vs 16 bit files and tonal manipulations. The ONLY thing I am challenging is the need to do high bit tonal manipulations to color image files, period...nothing more, nothing less. > Among > those is the > fact that since as you say if you get the setpoints and tonal corrections > reasonably close to the scanner driver using high bit, you have done > essentially what they say they are doing just they have choose to do the > setpoint correction and tonal adjustments to the high bit data in a third > party editor rather than in the scanner... The only point of my mentioning that the scanner uses high bit data to do that was simply to mention it. But there is another reason that scanner hardware uses more bits, and it has not a single thing to do with tonal manipulation ability. It is density range. When you scan, your image only takes up some "part" of the overall N bits. That "part" is larger for slides, as they have a higher density range, and lower for negatives. > ...even if it is possible with the > scanner software that they are using since they feel more > comfortable with > the third party image editor or it is better than that of the scanner > software. Not something I have any issue with. > I think they all recognize that to apply some Photoshop plugins > and features or even to print they need to convert the file to 24 bit in > order to do so and that that should take place after the tonal corrections > and setpoionts have been established. Setpoints, yes...but tonal corrections can take place in 8 bit color space with no visible degradation over high bit space. At least in the hundreds of images I tried this with...and that's not to say there isn't an image that may benefit from high bit manipulations, but I've yet to see it...and no one's able to produce it ;-) > There is also the fact that, while > one can establish set points and tonal curves that match the optimum > hardware capabilities of the given scanner and that these can remain > constant... But you don't set setpoints and tonal curves to match the scanner, at least I don't...nor should anyone, really. You set them to match the image. The images can vary greatly, depending on the film, exposure etc. > ...for most of us, the subject matter being scanned does not remain > constant and may require modification of the set points and tonal curves > from scan to scan or so and is dependent on the original being scanned > rather than the devices capabilities per se. I've never said any differently, and that is how I scan as well. > Such modifications > may best be > done after the scan in an image editor where one can actually preview the > consequences of proposed adjustments on the fly in real time as they are > being done. Hum...my scanner software does exactly that... But, this is really not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is only tonal curve manipulation in 8 bit vs 16 bit...not setpoints. Setpoints MUST be done to high bit data, and I've never said any differently. > In that case the establishment of setpoints and tonal curves > for the scan should be taken as merely a preliminary raw approximation > rather than the final product with the main tonal moves being done post > scanning. Even if you could get high bit data from a setpointed and tonal curved scan (which in my experience most scanners either give you non-setpointed/non-tonal curved high bit data, or setpointed and tonal curved 8 bit data), I still contend that tonal curve manipulation won't be any better because you do it with high bit data. > Second, it very well can be the case that one does not wish to > replicate the > exact setpoints and tonal curve of the original that was scanned but to > deliberately alter or modify the tonal character of the scanned result for > artistic or other reasons; there would be every reason for doing major > tonal moves post scanning. OK...but again, the contention was only tonal curves, not setpoints. But, setpoints aren't really an issue either. Yes, they must be initially applied to high bit data and MUST be simply be
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
I don't think so. I am using version 7.6.something. I do not remember the complete version number and am not near the system that has the software on it. Maybe I am looking in the wrong place, I would welcome any suggestins as to the location of the comand that produces a visual histogram. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Marquis-Kyle Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: > I just checked my copy of VueScan > ...It does not present a visual histogram > of the scanned image... I guess you are using a pretty old version of Vuescan, Laurie? Peter Marquis-Kyle www.marquis-kyle.com.au Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Frank, Comments like that are really uncalled for and should be kept to yourself. They add nothing but fuel to the fire. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Frank Paris Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Austin Franklin > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16 > > > Henk, > > > If you don't believe me, I am sorry. > > Not only do I not believe you, I know what you're saying is > wrong. Again, if someone here really wanted to shut me up > about this, then provide an image What a troll. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16 Laurie, >> At the risk of raising Austin's ire, >Au contraire! You hit the nail on the head ;-) Gee, that is good I hope. :-) >> I think that he is being more of a >> purist than most people in both what he regards as the proper workflow and >> the correct way to use scanners to capture images off of film or flat >> artwork and prints. >Exactly! Magnificient; but here comes the other shoe. >> While I do see some technical disagreements in >> the discussion as to possible benefits and uses of 16-bit scans >> (raw lineal >> or raw non-lineal scans) and the potential benefits and uses of >> enhancement >> and adjustment tools the support working with 16-bit files, >But...here's the rub. If you get the setpoints and tonal corrections >reasonably close in the scanner driver, keep in mind, this is all done using >high bit data... it's just how scanners work...it completely moots the >discussion of 16 vs 8 bit files...as there would be no need to do large >tonal moves post scanning. The other shoe? First, it assumes that the software being used allows for this; but granting that it does for purposes of argument, it may completely moot the discussion for you but not for others for a number of reasons that they are trying to tell you but while you are listening you are not hearing. Among those is the fact that since as you say if you get the setpoints and tonal corrections reasonably close to the scanner driver using high bit, you have done essentially what they say they are doing just they have choose to do the setpoint correction and tonal adjustments to the high bit data in a third party editor rather than in the scanner even if it is possible with the scanner software that they are using since they feel more compfortable with the third party image editor or it is better than that of the scanner software. I think they all recognize that to apply some Photoshop plugins and features or even to print they need to convert the file to 24 bit in order to do so and that that should take place after the tonal corrections and setpoionts have been established. There is also the fact that, while one can establish set points and tonal curves that match the optimum hardware capabilities of the given scanner and that these can remain constant, for most of us, the subject matter being scanned does not remain constant and may require modification of the set points and tonal curves from scan to scan or so and is dependent on the original being scanned rather than the devices capabilities per se. Such modifications may best be done after the scan in an image editor where one can actually preview the consequences of proposed adjustments on the fly in real time as they are being done. In that case the establishment of setpoints and tonal curves for the scan should be taken as merely a preliminary raw approximation rather than the final product with the main tonal moves being done post scanning. Second, it very well can be the case that one does not wish to replicate the exact setpoints and tonal curve of the original that was scanned but to deliberately alter or modify the tonal character of the scanned result for artisitic or other reasons; there would be every reason for doing major tonal moves post scanning. >> As for persons claiming that certain technical scanning problems >> are either produced because scans were 8 bit rather than 16 bit or can best be deal >> with if the file is 16 bit versus 8 bit, I think that this is essentially an >> empirical and practical question (even if theoretically and >> analytically a case could be made for said claims). Thus, Austin's request for concrete >> examples is legitimate and justified with respect to such claims. >And, interestingly enough, no one can come up with any images that >demonstrate this. >> That they >> have not been produced does not indicate as he would have it that they do >> not exist or are not significant; but it does serves as grounds for his >> refusal to accept said claims as well as legitimate grounds for his not >> wanting to partake in the discussion... >Hey, did I say that? ;-) Maybe not; but it was implied even if you did not think you said or implied it. It is that implication that I think is responsible for raising the hackels of some of those with whom you are locked in this inane debate with. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Vuescan profiles
"Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >How does the color calibration in VS work? The scanner profiles are generated by Ed. The film profiles are from the Kodak PhotoCD profile set ie. the profiles which the Kodak scanner uses when making PhotoCDs. That's why (sadly) there's no profiles for the new Fuji films. :( Using a target would be fine for making a scanner profile, but only for the type of film used by the maker of the target. I think the Kodak target is Ektachrome slide film? Rob PS My knowledge of Vuescan is out of date - I noticed elsewhere in the most recent digest there was mention of ICC profiles. What I've said above was true for older versions of Vuescan, but only Ed would be able to say what the current situation was. - How do you know if you never try? (Rob Geraghty 25 June 2002) Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Laurie, > At the risk of raising Austin's ire, Au contraire! You hit the nail on the head ;-) > I think that he is being more of a > purist than most people in both what he regards as the proper workflow and > the correct way to use scanners to capture images off of film or flat > artwork and prints. His position is basically that the scanner when used > properly should produce an accurate and proper reproduction of > the subject > matter that it is capturing and that the use of post scanning > image editing > programs (either scanner programs or applications like Photoshop) > should not > be necessary and are only to be used as (a) a last resort, (b) to do > creative manipulations and artsy derivatives generated off the > original, or > (c) to do restorations. Exactly! > While I do see some technical disagreements in > the discussion as to possible benefits and uses of 16-bit scans > (raw lineal > or raw non-lineal scans) and the potential benefits and uses of > enhancement > and adjustment tools the support working with 16-bit files, But...here's the rub. If you get the setpoints and tonal corrections reasonably close in the scanner driver, keep in mind, this is all done using high bit data... it's just how scanners work...it completely moots the discussion of 16 vs 8 bit files...as there would be no need to do large tonal moves post scanning. > As for persons claiming that certain technical scanning problems > are either > produced because scans were 8 bit rather than 16 bit or can best be deal > with if the file is 16 bit versus 8 bit, I think that this is > essentially an > empirical and practical question (even if theoretically and > analytically a > case could be made for said claims). Thus, Austin's request for concrete > examples is legitimate and justified with respect to such claims. And, interestingly enough, no one can come up with any images that demonstrate this. > That they > have not been produced does not indicate as he would have it that they do > not exist or are not significant; but it does serves as grounds for his > refusal to accept said claims as well as legitimate grounds for his not > wanting to partake in the discussion... Hey, did I say that? ;-) Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
Frank, > But they don't need being picked on. You do. You're supposed to be an adult. Why not behave like one, especially in public? This is a technical forum, and I believe that most everyone here would appreciate it if you kept your personal issues out of this forum. Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
https://www.hamrick.com/rep.html Go to this site and get updated serial number. Thanks Ramesh -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:02 PM To: Nagaraj, Ramesh Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) I have DL'ed the latest version. When I use my old Vuescan serial number, I still get the $$$ watermarks on my scans. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Atherton Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) > I am scanning slides almost exclusively. I got VueScan as a > benefit of being > a VuePrint purchaser years ago. I got free upgrades for a long time, but > they ended that with a version just above my 7.5.41. Stan - so did I, but I still get free upgrades...? tim Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Austin Franklin > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:00 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more > > > Henk, > > > Austin Franklin writes: > > > > > I have little experience with Viewscan, > > > > No experience at all I think. Austin doesn't know how to spell the > > name right... > > My spelling of it is in fact correct. If you want to fuss > about capitalization of the "S", fine, but if you look > through my posts, you will see I typically capitalized the > "S". Oh, and what about the other dozen or so people who > didn't capitalize the S and made posts here, are you going to > "call them" on it as well? But they don't need being picked on. You do. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Austin Franklin > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16 > > > Henk, > > > If you don't believe me, I am sorry. > > Not only do I not believe you, I know what you're saying is > wrong. Again, if someone here really wanted to shut me up > about this, then provide an image What a troll. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Austin Franklin > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:51 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more > > > Hi David, > > > But do you scan negative films as > > positive and invert and remove the mask by hand? If you are > getting a > > positive RGB file as a starting point, you are using just as much > > "automation" as Vuescan provides. > > Not so. I set setpoints and apply tonal curves in the > scanner driver. Frank said he ONLY sets "brightness"... I thought I said most of the time. Sometimes because of a poor exposure I'm forced to fiddle with other controls. I forgot to mention that I also fiddle with RGB. I've found that doing it in the VueScan driver saves me time in PS. > > You're still doing cheapshots: it's not pretty. > > Not a cheap shot at all. It's simply a statement of fact. Fiddlesticks. You are apparently totally insensitive to the tone of your posts. At least I KNOW when I'm being insulting and childish. You don't have a clue. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: > I just checked my copy of VueScan > ...It does not present a visual histogram > of the scanned image... I guess you are using a pretty old version of Vuescan, Laurie? Peter Marquis-Kyle www.marquis-kyle.com.au Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
Austin, I just checked my copy of VueScan. It does alow for a rudimentary establishment of set points base on percentages 0-100% for Black, White, Red, Green, and Blue. It does not present a visual histogram of the scanned image nor does it provide for levels and curves manipulation of the tonal curve apart from manual establishment of the set points. Under one of its settings, you can call up canned levels and curves by selecting under the color tab one of the selections. Below is quoted from the VueScan help file: Color tab This tab is used to control the colors of the preview and scan. It lets you specify film type, film base color, image brightness, color balancing, black and white points and color space. Color balance Use this option to set the type of color balance you want for each image. The default setting of White Balance is appropriate for typical lighting conditions. See the topic "Adjusting Color Balance" for general guidance on using Neutral and Auto levels to handle these cases if White Balance is not right. None The black and white points aren't used at all, and the image is only corrected for the CCD's color response (if the Media type option is set to Image) or by the film's color response. This image is gamma corrected. Manual Both the black and white points are used to stretch the image's intensity range. However, the relative ratios of red, green, and blue are specificed manually. Neutral Both the black and white points are used to stretch the image's intensity range. However, the relative ratios of red, green, and blue are kept constant. Tungsten Both the black and white points are adjusted to compensate for an image lit by tungsten light (i.e. a normal incandescent light bulb). This removes the reddish cast from indoor pictures taken without a flash. Fluorescent Both the black and white points are adjusted to compensate for an image lit by fluorescent light. This removes the greenish cast from indoor pictures lit by fluorescent lights or lit by flash. Night Both the black and white points are adjusted to compensate for an image taken at night. The white balance is determined from the darkest 10% of the image, which often produces the best results when images have bright fluorescent or incandescent lights that are greenish or yellowish. Auto levels This is a simple mapping of the darkest color to 0.00 intensity and the brightest color to 0.95 intensity. White balance VueScan analyzes the image and adjusts it to make neutral colors appear more neutral. Landscape VueScan analyzes the image and adjusts it to make neutral colors appear more neutral, sky blue colors appear more lifelike and green foliage colors more lifelike. Portrait VueScan analyzes the image and adjusts it to make neutral colors appear more neutral and skin tones appear more lifelike. Black point (%) The black point is used by the color balance algorithm and is computed by using the histogram of each color in the image. Use this option to leave the black point at the minimum intensity (0%), or to choose the black point such that some percentage of the pixels in the image are below the black point. The default black point is 0. Setting a higher value will cause tones close to black to become pure black, which can improve contrast. Setting the black point too high will cause shadow detail to be lost. Black point red/green/blue This option lets you set the black point manually. Note that these values are in linear space, not gamma corrected space, so the only practical way to use these values is to use the "Input|Lock image color" option. White point (%) The white point is used by the color balance algorithm and is computed by using the histogram of each color in the image. Use this option to leave the white point at the maximum intensity (0%), or to choose the white point such that some percentage of the pixels in the image are above the white point. The default white point is 1% (that is, the brightest 1% of pixels are all converted to pure white). Setting a higher value will cause tones close to white to become pure white. This can improve contrast and overall intensity of the image. Setting the white point too high will cause details in areas of highlights (e.g. the gray puffs of a cloud) to be lost, making the image look flat. White point red/green/blue This option lets you set the white point manually. Note that these values are in linear space, not gamma corrected space, so the only practical way to use these values is to use the "Input|Lock image color" option. Brightness Use this option to increase or decrease the overall image brightness. VueScan's brightness is effectively a multiplier of the gamma of the color space. Brightness red/green/blue Use these options to increase or decrease the red/green/blue image brightness. Note that this is a gamma multiplier, where 1.0 is the default setting. Film base color red/green/blue This option displays values for the base colo
[filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is betteraboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
There was a point some time ago, when Ed brought in the new pricing where "original" owners had to get a new serial number (or something like that?) try emailing ed hamrick tim > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better > aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) > > > I have DL'ed the latest version. When I use my old Vuescan serial > number, I > still get the $$$ watermarks on my scans. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Atherton > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better > aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) > > > > > > I am scanning slides almost exclusively. I got VueScan as a > > benefit of being > > a VuePrint purchaser years ago. I got free upgrades for a long time, but > > they ended that with a version just above my 7.5.41. > > Stan - so did I, but I still get free upgrades...? > > tim > > -- > -- > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > > -- > -- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with > 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the > message title or body > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Are there multiple versions of SRGB?
Bingo, you got it. Thanks! Foir the life of me, I could not remember it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Austin Smith Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 1:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Are there multiple versions of SRGB? I believe that the Nikon RAW format is called NEF. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
I believe that Ed set the cut off on free upgrades to registered users of Vuescan, whose original purchase was of Vuescan and not a predecessor, terminating the free upgrade privileges for those who originally bought and registered earlier programs which preceded Vuescan that Ed had developed and marketed before coming out with Vuescan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 6:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) I have DL'ed the latest version. When I use my old Vuescan serial number, I still get the $$$ watermarks on my scans. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Atherton Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) > I am scanning slides almost exclusively. I got VueScan as a > benefit of being > a VuePrint purchaser years ago. I got free upgrades for a long time, but > they ended that with a version just above my 7.5.41. Stan - so did I, but I still get free upgrades...? tim Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Henk, At the risk of raising Austin's ire, I think that he is being more of a purist than most people in both what he regards as the proper workflow and the correct way to use scanners to capture images off of fillm or flat artwork and prints. His position is basically that the scanner when used properly should produce an accurrate and proper reproduction of the subject matter that it is capturing and that the use of post scanning image editiing programs (either scanner programs or applications like Photoshop) should not be necessary and are only to be used as (a) a last resort, (b) to do creative manipulations and artsy deriviatives generated off the original, or (c) to do restorations. Most users do not follow that work flow nor take that approach to scanning. While I do see some technical disagreements in the discussion as to possible benefits and uses of 16-bit scans (raw lineal or raw non-lineal scans) and the potential benefits and uses of enhancement and adjustment tools the support working with 16-bit files, I think that much of the fire in the debate does not really appear to revolve around the technical aspects as much as the difference in approaches to scanning and uses for the files being produced. As for persons claiming that certain technical scanning problems are either produced because scans were 8 bit rather than 16 bit or can best be deal with if the file is 16 bit versus 8 bit, I think that this is essentially an empirical and practical question (even if theroretically and analytically a case could be made for said claims). Thus, Austin's request for concrete examples is legitimate and justified with respect to such claims. That they have not been produced does not indicate as he would have it that they do not exist or are not significant; but it does serves as grounds for his refusal to accept said claims as well as legitimate grounds for his not wanting to partake in the discussion ( something which he suggestes is the case but which apparently he is unable to follow up on by just not responding). As for everyone, myself included, if something works for you, why not just continue to do it rather than getting into arguments with those who disagree on these lists so as to turn it into a battle of who is right and who is wrong, which method is the proper way to do things and which is not, or what workflow is better. Once every0one has said what they do ot think should be done, we should all know what the universe of opinions and positions are and be done with it without getting into extended arguments. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Henk de Jong Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 2:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 8 bit versus 16 Austin Franklin wrote: > If you require extreme tonal curve manipulation, then I suggest you > look at getting the image "right" on film, instead of relying on your > image editing program to get it right for you after the fact. I am a travel photographer in my spare time. Most of the time I come home from a travel I can not do a second time. The films I bring home is all the material I have. When light conditions at the moment of taking the photo were bad, but the photo is to important to miss, the only way to use the photo is by extreme manipulation. > Of course, there are some instances where this is not possible/practical. So, in the end you admit... :-) -- Henk de Jong http://www.hsdejong.nl/ Nepal and Burma (Myanmar) - Photo Galleries Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was ...
For a brief period a few months back, there was some problem, as I recall, with serial number activation. He had to make some kind of changes because of some people generating false numbers or something like that. I e-mailed Ed and he gladly gave me a new serial number when he checked my data on file. I am sure he would do the same for you if you are entitled to upgrades. Howard Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
I have DL'ed the latest version. When I use my old Vuescan serial number, I still get the $$$ watermarks on my scans. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tim Atherton Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better aboutVuescan? (was 24 bit vs more) > I am scanning slides almost exclusively. I got VueScan as a > benefit of being > a VuePrint purchaser years ago. I got free upgrades for a long time, but > they ended that with a version just above my 7.5.41. Stan - so did I, but I still get free upgrades...? tim Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Henk, > > If you require extreme tonal curve manipulation, then I suggest you > > look at getting the image "right" on film, instead of relying on your > > image editing program to get it right for you after the fact. > > I am a travel photographer in my spare time. Most of the time I come home > from a travel I can not do a second time. The films I bring home > is all the > material I have. When light conditions at the moment of taking the photo > were bad, but the photo is to important to miss, the only way to use the > photo is by extreme manipulation. > > > Of course, there are some instances where this is not > possible/practical. > > So, in the end you admit... I'd suggest re-reading what I wrote...this time carefully ;-) I said I understood that situations exist where the image simply isn't taken "right" in the first place. That is an entirely separate issue from the *need* to use high bit data for tonal curve manipulation, whether the original image is "right" or not. So, in the end, you, nor any one else, are able to provide an image that substantiates these claims. Funny how that is. Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 8 bit versus 16
Austin Franklin wrote: > If you require extreme tonal curve manipulation, then I suggest you > look at getting the image "right" on film, instead of relying on your > image editing program to get it right for you after the fact. I am a travel photographer in my spare time. Most of the time I come home from a travel I can not do a second time. The films I bring home is all the material I have. When light conditions at the moment of taking the photo were bad, but the photo is to important to miss, the only way to use the photo is by extreme manipulation. > Of course, there are some instances where this is not possible/practical. So, in the end you admit... :-) -- Henk de Jong http://www.hsdejong.nl/ Nepal and Burma (Myanmar) - Photo Galleries Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Are there multiple versions of SRGB?
I believe that the Nikon RAW format is called NEF. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
Henk, > > I have little experience with Viewscan, > > No experience at all I think. Austin doesn't know how to spell the name > right... I sit corrected, this product that we are discussing is spelled VUEScan! Which, of course, has no bearing on much of anything...and my misspelling is all you seem to be able to hang your hat on. Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
Henk, > Austin Franklin writes: > > > I have little experience with Viewscan, > > No experience at all I think. Austin doesn't know how to spell the name > right... My spelling of it is in fact correct. If you want to fuss about capitalization of the "S", fine, but if you look through my posts, you will see I typically capitalized the "S". Oh, and what about the other dozen or so people who didn't capitalize the S and made posts here, are you going to "call them" on it as well? Obviously, you, or any of your cohorts, are able to win the argument here by showing factual images that support your claims... Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
> Austin, > > >From what I remember Ed Hamrick saying, he uses Kodak calibration data on > film types. > > Bob Frost. Hi Bob, >From my experience, I've found that to be rather inaccurate...as I've said, development and exposure play a big part on tonality. Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
Henk, > Most images will do with 8 bit manipulation... Simply show me one that doesn't. > but > some with extreme curves or white and/or black point applied have > difficulties. White and/or black points applied? ALL 8 bit images have the setpoints applied, unless you have some weird/old scanner that only provides 8 bit data! > If you don't believe me, I am sorry. Not only do I not believe you, I know what you're saying is wrong. Again, if someone here really wanted to shut me up about this, then provide an image...no one has...or can. > I you never had seen this 8 bit manipulation problem, I assume you always > have simple good snapshots to start with... Yes, simple snapshots with my Hasselblads...the ultimate P&S...or simply that the "problem" doesn't exist ;-) If you require extreme tonal curve manipulation, then I suggest you look at getting the image "right" on film, instead of relying on your image editing program to get it right for you after the fact. Of course, there are some instances where this is not possible/practical. Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
Hi David, > But do you scan negative films as > positive and invert and remove the mask by hand? If you are getting a > positive RGB file as a starting point, you are using just as much > "automation" as Vuescan provides. Not so. I set setpoints and apply tonal curves in the scanner driver. Frank said he ONLY sets "brightness"...and does not do any setpoints and tonal curves (though brightness is a simplified tonal curve)... I hardly consider inversion and mask removal "automation"... Automatic setpoints and tonal curves are. > > > and well worth the > price of admission for people who want more automated scanning. > < > > You're still doing cheapshots: it's not pretty. Not a cheap shot at all. It's simply a statement of fact. Viewscan does allow better automated scanning than most scanner supplied software, does it not? Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Are there multiple versions of SRGB?
Apart from the fact that our posts apparently crossed each others paths in transmission and reception, I really have little further to offer. As far as I know, and you have not contradicted it, there is only one sRGB standard or versions, although there may be multiple implementations, which can loosely be considered versions. However, if they are considered versions, then there are a great many versions of sRGB and - in practice - no sRGB standard. As for the camera manufacturer programing in color gamut adjustments and corrections which are linked to different camera setting that use sRGB as its color space, this is not only a possibility but a reality since they are already doing it in both their digital cameras and in their film cameras where they have landscape, portrait, night photography, etc. settings the established pre-programmed default settings which they think are the ones that will satisfy most users for those subjects as well as a manual and non-programmed automatic setting. In the case of Nikon, I suspect that they consider the Adobe RGB 1998 to be professional color space for serious amatures and professionals as contrasted to the the two sRGB settings. Although it was not mentioned, I think Nikon also has a setting for RAW ouput (I forget what they call their raw data format) in their higher end digital cameras, where one can assign a color space and make ones adjustments in a third party image editing program like Photoshop.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ellis Vener Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 8:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Are there multiple versions of SRGB? On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 10:10 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: > To the best of my knowledge, there is only one version of sRGB. As I pointed out in a posting yesterday, the different manufacturers implement colorspace s slightly differently than the standard. For example: Fuji says that the Frontier printers are sRGB machines but several people have looked at that the Frontiers printers produce and the actual gamut produced is wider than the sRGB standard says it should be. If the camera is doing the basic color processing, then yes of course Nikon or Canon or Minolta or Fuji or kodak or Imacon or Leaf, etc. can program in an option that tells the camera to bias the color gamut to what they think will be a "more pleasing" rendition of color for skin tones or landscapes. Theoretically It would be possible to bias the color to look like any color bias you wanted: Velvia, Astia 100F, Provia 100, Provia 100F, Kodak EPN, E100G, E100GX, Kodak Portra 160VC, Agfa whatever, etc. of course that means the color wouldn't be accurate -- for that you have a wide colorspace and NEF and RAW -- but it could be done. Maybe a smart manufacturer will offer this as an firmware kit to be sold as an option for those who want such a thing. Best Regards, Ellis Vener Atlanta, GA http://www.ellisvener.com Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Canon's new digital SLR
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > ?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E5kon_T_S=F8nderland?= > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:31 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Canon's new digital SLR > > > Martin Reddington wrote: > > >This camera is now available in some shops in the US and > Asia and there > >is a lively debate on it in a special forum at > >http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1031. So far some > >problems with flash exposure have been reported and the main > complaint > >so far seems to be the lack of flash exposure compensation from the > >camera. > > > For me the most important thing about this camera is the > yardstick it sets for all the other DSLR producers when it > comes to price-point and features. > > I can hardly see Nikon and the others not having a product > that can match this. People on the dpreview list are talking about a D70 coming out soon. But Nikon never seems to be in a rush to respond to Canon's technological onslaughts. I'm bogged down with a dozen Nikon lenses and am quietly waiting for a weather-sealed camera suitable for landscape photography. This won't be a D70. Maybe the D2X if it's < $4K. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 24bit vs more
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 11:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more > > > I didn't write any of this, nor was I even quoted in any of > the exchange. A bit of prejudicial assumption on your part, perhaps? > > As you will note from your own email software, these quotes > were written by Austin. > > I also do not use Vuescan, but I have not made any comments > about it relative to this debate, Dickie, oh, I mean David ;-) > > Art But sometimes it's hard to tell you two apart, since you both troll so much. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: 8 bit versus 16
> Austin Franklin wrote: > > > How do you know the original scanner data is any good? > I can tell from the smooth histogram in VueScan and the > Dropper Tool in PSP. > > >> A photo editing program working with 16 bit/channel and feeding it > >> with the maximum available bit-depth from the scanner would be the > >> solution. > > How do you know? > How do you know the earth is round? Do you need extra proof? > > > That's nice, but show me some images that show a tonal manipulation > > problem with 8 bit color data. > No, I don't show you my kitchen. You have to do with the food > I serve... :-) > > > Funny enough...all you people who have this BIG problem, > It is not a BIG problem. Most images will do with 8 bit > manipulation, but some with extreme curves or white and/or > black point applied have difficulties. > > If you don't believe me, I am sorry. > I you never had seen this 8 bit manipulation problem, I > assume you always have simple good snapshots to start with... > > > -- > Regards, > Henk de Jong Austin Franklin can be dismissed as a troll. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Are there multiple versions of SRGB?
On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 10:10 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: > To the best of my knowledge, there is only one version of sRGB. As I pointed out in a posting yesterday, the different manufacturers implement colorspace s slightly differently than the standard. For example: Fuji says that the Frontier printers are sRGB machines but several people have looked at that the Frontiers printers produce and the actual gamut produced is wider than the sRGB standard says it should be. If the camera is doing the basic color processing, then yes of course Nikon or Canon or Minolta or Fuji or kodak or Imacon or Leaf, etc. can program in an option that tells the camera to bias the color gamut to what they think will be a "more pleasing" rendition of color for skin tones or landscapes. Theoretically It would be possible to bias the color to look like any color bias you wanted: Velvia, Astia 100F, Provia 100, Provia 100F, Kodak EPN, E100G, E100GX, Kodak Portra 160VC, Agfa whatever, etc. of course that means the color wouldn't be accurate -- for that you have a wide colorspace and NEF and RAW -- but it could be done. Maybe a smart manufacturer will offer this as an firmware kit to be sold as an option for those who want such a thing. Best Regards, Ellis Vener Atlanta, GA http://www.ellisvener.com Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
Austin Franklin wrote: > How does the color calibration in > VS work? To close the calibration loop, > you really need to take a picture of a > known target and do so for each > film/development/camera and/or > lense (as different lenses render colors > differently) etc., and even then there > may be other variables that makes it > not work as well as you might hope... > like exposure/development etc. The > only way to close the loop somewhat > is to take a picture of a color target > on each roll...which I did routinely > when doing commercial work. Austin, recent versions of Vuescan can create an ICC device profile by scanning and analysing an IT8 or Q60 target. Of course this is only good for that particular scanner and type of positive transparency film, and can't adjust for the vagaries of lighting, subject or camera. Peter Marquis-Kyle www.marquis-kyle.com.au Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
"Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I didn't write any of this, nor was I even quoted in any of the exchange. A bit of prejudicial assumption on your part, perhaps? < No, no. Just me being dizzy and too hasty. Abject apologies. >>> I also do not use Vuescan, but I have not made any comments about it relative to this debate, Dickie, oh, I mean David ;-) <<< Touché! David J. Littleboy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tokyo, Japan Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
Austin, >From what I remember Ed Hamrick saying, he uses Kodak calibration data on film types. Bob Frost. - Original Message - From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> How does the color calibration in VS work? Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Canon's new digital SLR
Martin Reddington wrote: >This camera is now available in some shops in the US and Asia and there is a >lively debate on it in a special forum at >http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1031. So far some problems >with flash exposure have been reported and the main complaint so far seems >to be the lack of flash exposure compensation from the camera. > For me the most important thing about this camera is the yardstick it sets for all the other DSLR producers when it comes to price-point and features. I can hardly see Nikon and the others not having a product that can match this. Exicting times! I'll soon have to buy one too. Haakon (who just bougth the new Minolta 5400 scanner...) Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 8 bit versus 16
Austin Franklin wrote: > How do you know the original scanner data is any good? I can tell from the smooth histogram in VueScan and the Dropper Tool in PSP. >> A photo editing program working with 16 bit/channel and feeding >> it with the maximum available bit-depth from the scanner would be the >> solution. > How do you know? How do you know the earth is round? Do you need extra proof? > That's nice, but show me some images that show a tonal manipulation > problem with 8 bit color data. No, I don't show you my kitchen. You have to do with the food I serve... :-) > Funny enough...all you people who have this BIG problem, It is not a BIG problem. Most images will do with 8 bit manipulation, but some with extreme curves or white and/or black point applied have difficulties. If you don't believe me, I am sorry. I you never had seen this 8 bit manipulation problem, I assume you always have simple good snapshots to start with... -- Regards, Henk de Jong http://www.hsdejong.nl/ Nepal and Burma (Myanmar) - Photo Galleries Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Are there multiple versions of SRGB?
Joel, There may only be one official version - called sRGB IEC61966-2.1 - but even Apple have tweaked it and produced their own version:- "The only difference between sRGB IEC61966-2.1 and the sRGB Profile Apple ships is at the low end of the gamma curve. The standard specifies a linear response at the very darkest end of the range, then a 2.2 gamma curve for everything else. Apple's sRGB Profile is a 2.2 gamma curve for its entirety, which can be described by a smaller profile. John Gnaegy". So it is not suprising if Nikon et al have done their own mods. Now we even have a new official version - sRGB64. Bob Frost. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Are there multiple versions of SRGB? The sRGB color space has a strict definition. There is only one version. I'm not quite sure what Nikon is trying to say there -- maybe an editing error, or they make modifications to the sRBG specification with some other parameter on top of it, like sRBG with 2.0 gamma. I'm just guessing.. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
Austin Franklin writes: > I have little experience with Viewscan, No experience at all I think. Austin doesn't know how to spell the name right... -- Henk de Jong http://www.hsdejong.nl/ Nepal and Burma (Myanmar) - Photo Galleries Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: 24bit vs more
I didn't write any of this, nor was I even quoted in any of the exchange. A bit of prejudicial assumption on your part, perhaps? As you will note from your own email software, these quotes were written by Austin. I also do not use Vuescan, but I have not made any comments about it relative to this debate, Dickie, oh, I mean David ;-) Art David J. Littleboy wrote: > "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I have little experience with Viewscan, > << > > FWIW, Arthur, your cheapshots against Vuescan are really stupid; you don't > know what you are talking about. It's a powerful, flexible, scanner driver. > It's not about "automation" at all. The software provided with scanners does > a lot more things automatically than Vuescan. > > > as I have no need for it. My > scanner software gives me perfect scans, because I know how to use it. > Setpoint too and tonal curve tool. Anything beyond that is purely fluff, at > least for my scanner. > < > > The last I checked, Vuescan doesn't have a curves tool, although it's high > on the author's list of things to add. What it does have support for is > color calibration. > > David J. Littleboy > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Tokyo, Japan > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
