I agree. I've noticed those commercials also. If it were three years ago
(or maybe even two) I might have gotten one for family snapshots. Or would
have at least bought one for my 80 year old father.
Smart use of current technology. Maybe Kodak's not as backward as they lead
us to believe.
Sorry Nikon, it was the the LS with the IV that had normal contrast and the
one with the 4000 that had high contrast. It was my memory that had no
contrast.
-Original Message-
From: Oostrom, Jerry [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:53 PM
To: '[EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Julian Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Setting screen gamma problem
| BUT - the step wedge is still somewhat compressed towards the black
| end. To get it looking even steps
Why do you (or Ed) think 2700 dpi is not high enough for slide images?
What are you planning to do with your scans?
Print up to 13x18's on an Epson 1280.
Ed had written the following about the LS-40:
It's a good value, and the difference in resolution/D-Max isn't
significant for what I
Frank Nichols wrote:
I am using PEC-12 with PEC PADS on dirty negs as a first step.
I found an anti-static brush (StaticMaster) which is plutonium charged. It
seems to work well on my neg strips. But, I was wondering if anyone had any
comments on if it is a gimmick (any soft brush would
B.T.W. If Jerry is living near Nieuwegein (Utrecht), maybe I can try to
scan
his film in my ScanWit 2710?
I mean ScanWit 2720...
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:40:18 - Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Darned good advice, Tony. I've definitely seen this, and thought I'd
misunderstood the whole process!! Unfortunately, I didn't have this
information (or a scanner) 20 years ago. Still, I can avoid the problem
in
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:04:12 +0100 Steve Greenbank
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The only thing you have to watch with the digital printing labs is that
they
show perfectly things like grain and posturisation. My Epson hides all
but
the worst cases due to the way it lays down the ink.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:36:12 -0400 (EDT) Raphael Bustin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Gamma adjustments, by definition, don't
affect white point or black point --
only the stuff in between.
I'm sure even Vuescan has a a way to set
both of these -- if not, I'd trash it.
It has - the
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:48:39 -0400 (EDT) Raphael Bustin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
but I wonder about the wisdom
of overexposing C41 film that will be
scanned.
In my experience, it's the dense images that
are more likely to stress the scanner into
banding.
IDLE SPECULATION This
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:31:49 -0500 Laurie Solomon ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
While all films today may not be Estar, they are not acetate from what I
understand - may be Mylar or someother plastic base - but I could be
wrong
about that.
You may be right, but I thought all that were not
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:37:33 +0200 Tomasz Zakrzewski
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But I've just read a review od the 4000ED in German magazine digit
ftp://ftp.lasersoft.com.pl/SFPrasa2001/Digit_3-2001.pdf which says,
that the
true Dmax of this scanner is 2,3! It was even worse than with
Jerry, I'd suggest you find another photographer with another scanner
(this
List might help you--if there are any fellow-Dutchmen about, please pitch
in).
In the thread:
filmscanners: OT: I'm a bit in a paradox here!!?: was RE: VueScan + flat
colors (that disappear with Mika
I wrote:
If Jerry
Im using the Fuji lab daily. After scanning my work, putting the tif
picture on a cd-r to the customer I send via e-mail a jpg file and get
superb cheap ( 25 cent ] 10 x 15 cm copies to give away to they who have
participate.
The lab profile is almost 100% correct against my scannned
I haven't seen any film base deterioration yet in any of my
negs from the last 42 years (starting at age 10). I live in
the cool, moist UK, and they've been stored with no special
precautions. My octogenarian parents have lots of negs
stacked together in good condition in the original paper
Art, thanks a million. That was far more of a reply than I expected and
very, very helpful. I will definitely think through this one using your
advice.
Anthony Klouda
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: 29 June 2001
--- Hersch Nitikman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just went back to the Popular Photography issue
that reviewed the new
scanners, and what I saw was very different from
what was said here earlier
today. They rated the LS-4000 Very highly. In fact,
maybe too highly...
Well, PP seems to write
Art, I told him about that scanner. He really didn't want to wait another 6
months or more for it to hit the pipeline. Also, he has a 6x7 so the 6x6 max
info you posted was a deal-killer. OTOH, I have a large collection of 645
and 6x6 from years past. I might wait on this machine.
He ordered the
I saw your offer.
I'm not living 'close' to Nieuwegein, but perhaps I will try to post a sheet
of negatives (have to get permission from my wife ;-) her relatives are on
that sheet of film), of course with a CD and postage paid return envelope.
Thank you for your offer,
I'll contact you
Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No banding problems here, ever, with a SS4000.
I have seen banding in a SS4000 scan when using layers to bring up dark
details. Under normal circumstances you would never see it though.
Rob
Tony Sleep wrote:
You may be right, but I thought all that were not Estar were plain old
cellulose acetate, ever since the even more exciting nitrate stock was
phased out.
Yeah, don't you miss that old Nitrate based stuff. now, those were the
good old days! None of this namby-pamby
At 07:47 AM 6/29/01 +0100, you wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 07:48:39 -0400 (EDT) Raphael Bustin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
but I wonder about the wisdom
of overexposing C41 film that will be
scanned.
In my experience, it's the dense images that
are more likely to stress the scanner
Lloyd O'Daniel wrote:
Art, I told him about that scanner. He really didn't want to wait another 6
months or more for it to hit the pipeline. Also, he has a 6x7 so the 6x6 max
info you posted was a deal-killer. OTOH, I have a large collection of 645
and 6x6 from years past. I might wait on
Well, I actually like PP (Practical Photography, UK magazine) much better
than PP (Popular Potography, US magazine) but its the price/ads ratio
difference (pound/euro*amount_of_ads rates vs. US-dollar/euro*amount_of_ads)
that let me choose for a subscription on PP US. Occasionally I buy a PP UK
So what did you finally choose, Peter? And _are_ you happy with it (so
far)?
I am tempted to purchase SS4000. I was happy with HP S20 and after some time
I was not so happy (I grew up). Regardless what you get there will be time
when you look at the new technology available and you will be
Sorry to be difficult, but I don't believe that this is correct, and this
is exactly what I would like some confirmation of - either way. The whole
point of the non-linear transformations or mapping that leads to the
'gamma' that we are discussing is to make equal digital brightness steps
mahimahi wrote
I also use a Acer 2720s which the factory software includes a film type
selector. This helps a little but when scanning Fuji NPC 160 (which is not
included in the list of film types) produces similar green output.
With the Acer (don't know about the Nikon), it's possible to
Lynn: I understand that the digital machines will also accept an image that is
given to them on a disk and that the machine can make the print from it.
Wouldn't this allow you to controll all but the actual print process. You do do
all the adjustments in PS, or other similar program, first to
Frank wrote:
Unfortunately with the
scanwit you cannot adjust the exposure to test this.
Actually, you can, with Vuescan. Go to Auto Focus and change it to
Manual. You can then add small incremental plus or minus numbers to the
focus. Don't forget to change it back for normal scanning. :-)
Julian, I'm surprised no-one has given you a decent answer yet. I'm going to
launch-in, risking life and limb as a newbie to this list...
I believe that by creating a JPEG of your wedge and embedding within it a
reference to the sRGB profile, you have told Internet Explorer to translate
the
- Original Message -
From: Alan Tyson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:21 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Film base deterioration (was Digital
Shortcomings)
BTW, all this discussion on longevity brings me to the same
conclusion as last time we had a
Yes, that's the way I've done it in the past. Not a lot, though--only when I
want something slicker than my own printer will produce.
--LRA
From: Gordon Tassi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: why not digital minilabs?
Date: Fri, 29
Sorry, Frank, I obviously misread it, didn't I? Duh. That'll teach me to try
to clear my mail in a hurry!
Very good post, by the way. :-)
Best regards--LRA
Lynn,
I mentioned earlier in the post that you could adjust the focus, however,
you can't adjust the exposure - that is one short
Rafe,
FYI, I also have a new 8000 ED that has the same banding issue but I am
having a hard time getting upset over it.:) When I do the fine ccd it does
get rid of the problem but when I read the help associated with the
button it says that fine CCD can add as much as three times to the scan
At 15:25 29-06-01 -0500, Robert Kehl wrote:
BTW, all this discussion on longevity brings me to the same
conclusion as last time we had a prolonged archiving
discussion here - we need as much of *both* careful neg
storage *and* systematic digital archiving rearchiving as
we can be
Right now, I have three film cameras, a bunch of lenses and
a Nikon LS30 film scanner. I *don't* have thousands of
dollars to spend on a digicam. So I just want to get the
best out of the gear I have, and that's why I'm here on
this list. :)
It's a pivotal time, and it makes buying
- Original Message -
From: Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Film base deterioration (was Digital
Shortcomings)
I agree with you here Alan,
with emphasis being on rearchiving
Yo gang,
Anyone using linux (SUSE 7.2) with a Nikon LS 2000??? Drivers?
Later
--
Gracia M. Littauer...IA Local 764 NYC...living in Cooleemee NC
At 07:37 PM 6/29/01 -0400, Dan H. wrote:
I figure on spending $10-20k when all is said and done (spaced out over a
period of 2-3 years). I'm not opposed to spending $3k of that on a very
high quality film scanner, and several thousand for a top-notch SLR and pro
lenses. But I have to wonder if
At 05:15 PM 6/29/01 -0400, Dave H. wrote:
Rafe,
FYI, I also have a new 8000 ED that has the same banding issue but I am
having a hard time getting upset over it.:) When I do the fine ccd it does
get rid of the problem but when I read the help associated with the
button it says that fine CCD can
At 19:29 29-06-01 -0500, you wrote:
This discussion has led me to one conclusion that seems inescapable.
Clearly it's important to refresh our media assets every few years to keep
pace with technology. Perhaps the archival method with the greatest
longevity and 'universality' today is a
I visited Michael Reichmann's web site yesterday (not sure about
the spelling) wherein he claims that the Canon D30 produces a
better image, all around, than a Provia slide, shot on an EOS-1V,
and scanned on an Imacon at 3200 dpi.
Not sure I believe it, myself, but it is very provocative.
Based
on the advances in RAM technology over the past 10 years I am predicting a 1Giga
Pixel camera in the not too distant future (5 years or less). The significance
of this camera will be a drastic reduction is the required size of lenses by
using software digital zooming - this will be
Tomasz,
I have commented on the OD issues several times in the past and I will state
my view again.
Although OD/Dynamic range specification could be a useful in determining a
scanners performance, the numbers published by various scanner manufactures
are essentially useless. Every manufacturer
Last I heard it did not but I will check again.
David
-Original Message-
From: Bob Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 5:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:filmscanners: Polaroid 30 day return policy
On Wednesday, June 27, 2001
Lloyd,
I will follow up by asking the Mac Connection's Polaroid rep. I am sure he
can easily find another source who will be more cooperative.
I will get back to you.
David
-Original Message-
From: Lloyd O'Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:38 PM
If you are using Silverfast I might suggest you take a look a Ian Lyons web
site for a look at his tutorials.
David
-Original Message-
From: Raphael Bustin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 11:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re:
Title: RE: filmscanners: LS-4000ED Dmax 4,2 or rather 2,3?
Paul,
I would
suggest you ignore ALL the manufacturers specifications and base you decision
on looking at actual scans done by yourself or a reputable independent source.
I probably
could not be termed independent but I
--- Frank Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Based on the advances in RAM technology over the
past 10 years I am
predicting a 1Giga Pixel camera in the not too
distant future (5 years or
less). The significance of this camera will be a
drastic reduction is the
required size of lenses by
49 matches
Mail list logo
