Dave,
I don't know if I would really agree with you here. The software writers
must write the software to be usable on several different windows platforms
(98, ME, and 2000) and have no clue what is on each individuals computer.
It would take a looong time to test all the possible
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: filmscanners: Film Scanners and what they see.
Interesting! Is aliasing THE reason why scanning loses some sharpness. Or
are there others?
Hi!
AFAK Elite won't do batch scans. The Dimage Dual II will, however
and so does the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi (which I happen to use).
The latter one scans 4 mounted slides or 6 slides in a film strip holder.
The multi has also a holder for 50 mounted slides (expensive accessory)
Neither
Spencer,
Just out of curiosity, how fast are you able to scan the images? I am
running a AMD K6 450 with 384M of ram. I am able to prescan a roll of 36
between 10 and 11 minutes, and it is taking me just over 2 hours for the
strip to be scanned at 3600 dpi.
I too am running an AMD 450
Hi,
I have a LS2000 since a couple of monhts now and I'm struggling with a
nasty problem.
I'm using Silverfast 4 and even upgraded to Silverfast 5.1 with IT8
Calibration. Win2000 platform with Photoshop 5.02. MonacoEZcolor monitor
calibration with colorisensor.
After the IT8 calibration with
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had heard that Kodak has been having some problems with the rfs3600
software. Just can't understand why these things aren't thoughly field tested
before being released to the public. Since I am not that knowledgable about
computerease. It does concern me.
Dave,
I
on 02.12.00 08:59, filmscanners-digest aka Tony Sleep wrote:
I also need to work out how to configure Majordomo so digest members can post
to the list.
Does this explain why my message hasn't turned up on the list?
--
David Gordon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm sorry if you have seen this already but I understand that digest readers
can't post, which is what I was ...
Tony Sleep writes:
Until recently I had heard very little of failures apart from the initial
cable detachment problem
Well here's another. My SS400 is at Polaroid UK again. It
Paul, I am curious what kind of computer are you using mac or PC, and
PC
what cards are installed.
Adaptec 2940AU
If PC, which operating system are you using? I
Win 98se
am curious because I have had no lockups at all, and you are the third
person I've read about that has complained of
And I wanted to take the time to let you
all know that it was the fact that I had NOT selected a focus
point in my preview.
Well done that man. Now it'll be so sharp you'll be able to see the infamous
LS30 jaggies? g
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online
So I guess I'll use Austin's
method, since there is less processing involved and you get to actual
printing faster.
I applaud that you actually tried both and reached your own conclusions. Worth more
than any amount of argument and theory :)
Do you actually get the print finished quicker
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: filmscanners: Film Scanners and what they see.
Interesting! Is aliasing THE reason why scanning loses some sharpness. Or
are there others?
When I said "you get to actual printing faster" I was referring only to the
time it takes to resample in PS and actually start printing. On my 733 PIII,
it amounts to about 15 seconds during which the only thing I can do is strum
my fingers on my desk. According to the nuns that taught me in
Jean-Pierre writes ...
I have a LS2000 since a couple of monhts now and I'm struggling with
a
nasty problem.
...
In september I went to the PhotoKina in Koln, Germany, and had a
long talk
with some people at the Nikon stand. I saw some pictures they
scanned and I
didn't notice any phenomen
My filmstrips sometimes look like there is still some chemicals left on
them from processing. How can I get my filmstrips squeaky clean for
scanning? This includes dust and finger prints also.
Thanks in advance,
Dan
On a general note Rob, regarding PSP, do you feel that your results
are less than they might be through having to use the sRGB colour
space, rather than a wider gamut one?
The short answer is no, but the long answer involves issues like not having
the tools to know what I'm missing. What I
Does this explain why my message hasn't turned up on the list?
Did you receive a bounce message? You should have.
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info
comparisons
The most fundamental reason that scanners lose sharpness is because they are
area samplers rather than point samplers. This is a physical necessity due to
the finite size of each CCD cell. The resulting area integration of each
sample forms a physical low pass filter which softens the
Re-wash them with some photoflo and hang to dry in a dust free place. It is
probably the safest way to do it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dan Kimble
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 2:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Finger prints are very difficult to clean off film and sometimes can eat
into the emulsion if left on for any length of time since they are the
result of not only body oils but also possibly body acids. Sometimes you
can remove fresh fingerprints by using some of the commercial film cleaners
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2000 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: filmscanners: Film Scanners and what they see.
The most fundamental reason that scanners lose sharpness is because they
are
area samplers
Have you tried PEC-12,
Archivval Photographic Emulsion Cleaner?
Photographic Solutions, Inc.
1-800-637-3212
7 Granston Way, Buzzards Bay, MA 02532
Saturday, December 02, 2000
11:07:19 PM Pacific Standard Time
22 matches
Mail list logo
