SNIP
Any filtering of this nature would not be done at the lens level. A
lens is an optical device, and the best thing it can do is accurately
translate everything it sees to the sensitive/recording layer. This is
what all lenses strive toward. If any type of resolution lowering were
to
Because the transistion from digital image to print is non trivial. It's
similar to the problems of printing negitives.
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
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:06:18 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
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.
Hmm, well, I quite often do this, and still have never seen banding. Yours
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:29:41 +1000 Julian Robinson
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hence my
original question - should such a step wedge look evenly spaced on a
well set up monitor?
I've never yet seen one where this really is the case. CRT's just seem to
be inherently non-linear in the
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:41:02 +0900 mahimahi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I am having problems in regard to color cast removal when using the
Nikon
LS1000/silverfast combination. The problem shots are underwater images
which
include a deep blue background but end up pea green. Shots that do
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 05:16:18 -0400 rafeb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Temperatures should be lower this weekend,
so maybe I can check out the heat angle.
Heat may affect lubricants and tolerances, of course. Which may impact
resonant behaviour of the mechanism
The Super Fine Scan checkbox
Hemingway, David J 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 add as
I think we've had this argument before, about two years ago.
Perhaps it is true that Plutonium is not as risky as once reported, but
individual response to ionizing radiation is just that, and therefore a
relative unknown, so I prefer to err on the side of caution, and would
recommend others do
Walter Bushell wrote:
It is precisely the randomized nature of film that alaising does not
occur. There is no grid, so there is nothing to beat against, so to
speak.
So maybe the answer is to randomize the sensor array, Captain? Of
course, while keeping the dilithium crystals aligned...
At 07:46 AM 6/30/01 +0100, you wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 05:16:18 -0400 rafeb ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Temperatures should be lower this weekend,
so maybe I can check out the heat angle.
Heat may affect lubricants and tolerances, of course. Which may impact
resonant behaviour of the
Tony,
No they didn't. However, the vendor I purchased it from called me yesterday
to tell me the Nikon Rep will have a unit for me on Monday. I still have
not decided whether i am going to swap it out of try a different kind of
scanner.
Lawrence
Did they send you their test scan with no
At 07:46 AM 6/30/01 +0100, you wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:19:52 -0700 Karl Schulmeisters
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Well since the film I have from HS is some 30yrs old, and has been =
treated awfully for the most part, and still hasn't shown film-base =
deterioration,
I haven't seen
At 20:16 29-06-01 +0600, Gracia M. Littauer wrote:
Yo gang,
Anyone using linux (SUSE 7.2) with a Nikon LS 2000??? Drivers?
I'd like to know also re: LS4000. Until then I won't be able to wean myself
away from Windows even with Win4Lin (runs Photoshop in Linux).
Cary Enoch Reinstein aka
I wonder if it would be posisble to create a randomized pattern of sensors
on a CCD/CMOS chip?
/fn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Walter Bushell
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 11:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners:
Robert,
I understand your hesitancy, however, you make several assumptions that I
didnt.
1. SNR remains at todays levels.
2. Sensitivity remains at todays levels.
3. The array would be small - why not a 4 x 6 with a 10x increase in
density? that would require about 1.5GPixels (If I didn't slip
'Popular Photography' is to Photography as 'The Sound of Music' is to
Music.
ted orland
Robert Wright
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:53:25 +0200
From: Oostrom, Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: LS-4000ED Dmax 4,2 or rather 2,3?
I just read in Popular Photography about a test
Rafe wrote:
Shoulda listend to my wife. She said to give up
on film, get a digital camera.
Hope Rafe has a good, sturdy kitchen table! ;-)
--LRA
_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
I use Frontier prints for my commercial clients who need quantity
prints. The requirement is to prepare an output size TIFF file at 300
dpi, and tagged sRGB. My studio system is calibrated using
ColorVision PhotoCal and Profiler Pro, and the Frontier prints are
practically identical to my 1160
Frank,
Memory has increased at a rate of about 2 every 1.5
years. There is good reason to believe that this will
not change a lot during the next few years to come.
Even with new technologies being developed (if it
succeeds and can be used for imagers) it takes years
to get it ready for
At 07:43 AM 6/30/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote:
I wonder if it would be posisble to create a randomized pattern of sensors
on a CCD/CMOS chip?
This flies in the face of all known sampling theory!
I suspect that the optical system in most scanners provides
more than enough filtering to limit
At 07:42 AM 6/30/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote:
Robert,
I understand your hesitancy, however, you make several assumptions that I
didnt.
1. SNR remains at todays levels.
2. Sensitivity remains at todays levels.
3. The array would be small - why not a 4 x 6 with a 10x increase in
density? that
At 01:04 PM 6/30/01 -, Lynn Allen wrote:
Rafe wrote:
Shoulda listend to my wife. She said to give up
on film, get a digital camera.
Hope Rafe has a good, sturdy kitchen table! ;-)
--LRA
Huh? Sorry, that one went right over my head.
rafe b.
rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a number of C41 films dating back from when I
was yearbook photographer in high school... in the
late 1960s. None of them are showing any significant
signs of deterioration.
And I have some negs from about 1982 where the emulsion has virtually
dissolved
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:06:18 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
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.
Hmm, well, I quite often do this, and still have never seen banding. Yours
Dan Honemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snippage]
possibility of 6 Megapixel CCDs that are the same size as a 35 mm frame, I
have to wonder if a $3k film scanner is a smart investment right now.
I for one have hundreds of images already on 35mm film I want to translate
to digital, so the film
rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also don't really believe in film-grain aliasing --
film grain is essentially non-periodic, or, more
accurately white noise -- ie, containing
an even distribution of frequency elements from
DC to infinity.
I don't see why that excludes aliasing of the CCD
My 7.1.3 has a seperate control for Image Brightness and Gamma. Image brightness will
affect the blacks of the image, Gamma not so much.
I often leave Black to .01 or so which results in the black edge of negs or slide
masks going close to 0, I almost always go with Maximum and do any
Hi, Rafe, you wrote:
Huh? Sorry, that one went right over my head.
Reference to Steve's tongue-in-cheek remark (re the British Home Secretary's
erstwhile advice in case of atomic attack) to get under the kitchen table,
when he brought up a favorable example of digital photography. :-)
On
I just released VueScan 7.1.4 for Windows, Mac OS 8/9/X and Linux.
It can be downloaded from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
What's new in version 7.1.4
* Improved color fidelity when scanning film
* Fixed problem with Microtek ScanMaker V
* Fixed problem with using Nikon scanners
Doing successive previews, I recently found I couldn't revert to the
start over point. How does one do this?
Dave
My 7.1.3 has a seperate control for Image Brightness and Gamma.
Image brightness will affect the blacks of the image, Gamma not so
much.
I often leave Black to .01 or so
There might be a little confusion arising from the (earlier List) comparison
of the *causes* of Grain-Aliasing being like superimposing two patterns.
While the analogy is a good one, I'm more comfortable with Tony's previous
suposition that scanners in the 1200-2700ppi range often show G-A
File-Default Options
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Dave King [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan Settings
| Doing successive previews, I recently found I couldn't revert to the
| start over point. How
Herch wrote:
However, there is no way I could use a D-1x, or an F-5 and a
set of lenses, etc., without pain and suffering.
Rafe wrote:
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,
Anyone using linux (SUSE 7.2) with a Nikon LS 2000??? Drivers?
I had Slackware Linux running with an LS-30 but I think it amounts to
about the same thing. I used the coolscan back-end for the SANE package.
I think the same back-end supports LS-2000, LS-30, and maybe other
flavors. Let me
Thanks Maris. I tried that, but it didn't seem to work in one case.
I'll give it another shot.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan Settings
File-Default
Herch wrote:
However, there is no way I could use a D-1x, or an F-5 and a
set of lenses, etc., without pain and suffering.
Rafe wrote:
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
I am a complete newbie at this photography/scanning stuff. After playing
with my camera, flatbed scanner and new Scanwit for a couple months now, I
have started to get a bit more serious about understanding what I am doing.
This week I shot some pictures using FUGI Super HG 200 bracketing the
Frank Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. With 200 film, is the grain large enough for the 2700 DPI to record
it?
If so could some one describe it (or email me a couple scan clips showing
examples?)
Colour neg films have a random mixture of different sized dye clouds. The
only C41 film I've
At 07:26 PM 6/30/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote:
1. With 200 film, is the grain large enough for the 2700 DPI to record it?
If so could some one describe it (or email me a couple scan clips showing
examples?)
To answer your question. Yes.
Frank, the biggest single improvement in my photo
Frank, the biggest single improvement in my photo
technique these last couple of years was giving
up on generic ISO 200 negative films.
I took a different approach...I use MF. I can shoot Tri-X till the cows come home,
developed D-76 1:1, and they look very good IMO. I know that's BW,
40 matches
Mail list logo
