Hi lists,
That is interesting since SCSI is a simple thing to add to a PC, you
have to wonder why they went GPIB, which is a rather slow interface used
for electronic instruments. National Instruments more or less owns the
GPIB business. There is a very hidden form on their website where you
Hi,
I find ink jet prints look a bit odd in the dark areas as there is more
ink plopped on the page.
Have you seen a quad-tone/Piezography print, as opposed to a black-only
inkjet print?
I haven't seen any BW quads.
Then, I suggest you do ;-)
I'd like to understand why you use Tri-X
Hi Alex,
Austin, I noticed you use Leafscan 45.
I do.
So I begun to consider selling my leg and arm (and also my wife, car,
house and children) :-) for Nikon LS9000 till encountered people's
recommendation to go Leafscan 45 route instead.
What can you say about this one ? Can it still
Hi Laurie,
I am familiar with it and have heard good things about it from users; BUT
that is one of the sorts of things that I consider as the EXTRA WORK
required to remedy the issues I am speaking of. :-)
It's not an issue if you do a couple of things...as you touch on...
First, I believe
You should check out the PeizographyBW Black and White inkjet printing
system from Jon Cone (and inkjetmall.com). It is really amazing. No
bronzing, no metemerism, no fading, rich deep black and long tonal
scale. It is really, really very good.
Hi Lotusm50,
Do you have the original, or
Hi Roy,
Did you not have the ability to manually set the setpoints with this
software?
Regards,
Austin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Roy Harrington
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 11:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Hi Berry,
Austin, with respect to your last sentence, isn't the point
really that the
contrast range of negative film is greater than slide film?
I'm not sure what contrast range is, but I know what density range is.
Slide film has less exposure latitude, and records on a higher density
Tomek,
I'm a bit dissappointed by the number of comments as I thought that more
people would be able to give an advice on what the options are for MF film
quality scanning at the price of about 1000-1200 $.
If you are a bit technically inclined, I would highly recommend a
Leafscan45. For
Hi Laurie,
Always appreciate your butting in and corrections. :-)
You are too kind ;-)
If your
remarks are
based on the paragraph quoted alone, I will defend myself by noting that I
was only extrapolating from the original statement of the analogy by the
previous poster using their
Hi Art,
I just wanted to inform the members of this list that I will be unable
to respond to email between about March 31st and April 12th, as I will
be down in Seattle/Redmond chewing the fat with the MS teams.
Out of curiosity, why?
Have you tried www.mail2web.com? I find it invaluable
Hi Art,
Thanks for that link. It seems like a great service (I only hope they
are being honest about the mechanics they are claiming, and that indeed
they don't record passwords, etc).
I have not had any problem what so ever with them (mail2web.com). I do
suggest using the secure login, and
Art,
That line contains a specific number of sensors across it. For
simplicity, let's assume a film frame is one inch across by 1.5 wide.
That would mean if the scanner claimed a 4000 dpi (really ppi or pixels
per inch) resolution, the image dimensions when a file was created would
be 6000
How much better are they? Will a Minolta (for instance) handle my rippled
slides just fine, or will it be only somewhat better? I'm trying to decide
whether I should invest in a new scanner, or fix the old one. I wish
scanners had standardized DOF specs.
Paul,
I would be more interested in
Hi Paul,
You can probably buy a near perfect Leaf45 for around $1k. They have quite
good DOF.
Regards,
Austin
My LS-2000 finally died, so I'm in the market for a replacement.
However, I
have tons of slides that survived a fire, and that have nasty
curls to them,
and the Nikon never did a
Hi David,
How can a scanner have superior spectral response to a Bayer camera?
Unless all the sensors seen the same thing, they aren't seeing the same
thing. In a Bayer pattern sensor, each sensing element is seeing
different
light, unless there is a filter over the sensing elements that
Hi Paul,
Lower noise? What you are calling lower noise is dubious. Perceived
lower noise does not mean higher fidelity. How do you know it's lower
noise? Have you actually done a comparison of it to the original image
scene to see what was noise and what was not? The Bayer pattern
my claim was that 900x900 pixels of a 1Ds
image look a
lot better than 900x900 pixels of a 4000 dpi scanned image if you
print them
at the same size.
David,
Your terms are amorphous. looks a lot better in what regard? What may
look a lot better to you, or to anyone else, may not look a
Hi Paul,
when you look at the sky, you don't.
How do you know you don't?
But the point is that
the amount
of noise you get in the digital image depends upon the hardware, so it
obviously can't all be actual noise coming from the sky. My old
DiMage 7 is
_very_ noisy, even at ISO 100. My
Hi Paul,
But that doesn't mean that every combination of film/scanner has
noticeable
noise generated by these things in sky regions.
I assume drum scanners do much better, but they're a heck of a lot more
expensive than a Canon Digital Rebel.
As do high end CCD scanneras as well, and
Hi David,
How can a scanner have superior spectral response to a Bayer camera?
Unless all the sensors seen the same thing, they aren't seeing the same
thing. In a Bayer pattern sensor, each sensing element is seeing different
light, unless there is a filter over the sensing elements that
Hi David,
Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Because that's a different question. Someone argued that
scanners produce
better quality pixels because they measure all RGB, and I'm
pointing out
that this is wrong because scanned pixels are, in fact, worse
than digital
camera
Hi David,
Because that's a different question. Someone argued that scanners produce
better quality pixels because they measure all RGB, and I'm pointing out
that this is wrong because scanned pixels are, in fact, worse than digital
camera pixels.
It's not wrong. If you are talking image
I'm very sure!
The Pro 70 was the first consumer digicam with CFII and hence Microdrive
compatibility, it's that old :-)
It has a great lens and RAW capability so can dodge JPEG artifacts
altogether.
I know it's pushing the accepted wisdom, but people have mistaken the
pictures for
are unusual I suggest!!
Bob Frost.
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can't create detail where detail didn't exist in the
original file in the first place
Hi Preston,
Bob Frost (I believe it was) advocated sending 360ppi or 720ppi files to
a 720dpi desktop inkjet printer. It certainly makes intuitive sense that
on a 720dpi printer, a 720ppi file would work best.
Why you want to send the Epson, specifically, desktop printers 720 is
because they
Hi Austin,
And just where would you put Ansel Adam's highly manipulated
images in this
scheme of things?
Er, as highly manipulated images ;-)
Regards,
Austin
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Hi Bob,
I think you've missed my point. All images, whatever their ppi
(correct this
time, Austin)
I'm flattered, Bob ;-)
, printed on Epson inkjets are upsampled by the Epson driver,
unless they are already at the ppi which the driver requires (360ppi for
wideformat printers and 720ppi
Hi David,
Then there's the reality check of actually looking at film scans and
actually looking at some digital camera images and seeing how
they compare.
If one actually did that, one would see that, on a pixel-for-pixel basis
(that is, comparing the same number of pixels), film scans are
Hi David,
I think you've misunderstood what I've said. Take a 900 x 900 pixel crop
from your 5080 dpi scan and print it at 3x3 inches. Take a
900x900 crop from
a 10D image and print it at 3x3 inches. Which looks better?
That depends, and I am curious why you think that is of any value? If a
Hi Eugene,
240 dpi is all that is needed.
Needed? I have images that show more detail (and look better) using up to
480PPI to the printer...
Regards,
Austin
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Hi Austin,
The SCSI cable on my flatbed scanner is 6' long, and it's never
caused me a
problem. I don't believe I've ever seen anything longer, however.
Single ended SCSI, as most here will be using, is spec'd for up to 3 meters.
Typically, in my experience, the main issue people have with
Hi Bob,
240 dpi is not all that is needed..., because the Epson driver upsamples
that
(or any other dpi you send it) to 720 dpi (desktop printers),
using Nearest
Neighbour type upsampling. So 720 dpi is what is needed by the driver.
Just a minor clarification...both of you really mean PPI,
Roger,
Comparing digicam pixels to scanner pixels is misleading because scanner
pixels are
second-generation--4000 scanner pixels=2700 digicam pixels seems
empirically
like a good
approximation, but I don't have research to prove this.
So what if it's second generation? Unless you can
Karl,
Realistically, a 6mPixel camera is equiv to 4000dpi scan of 35mm film.
Where on earth do you get that idea? Basicall, your claim is simply not
even close.
Regards,
Austin
Unsubscribe by mail to
Hi Tom,
Hello afx, I think the slowness is primarily due to the glacial speed that
the scanner transfers data to the computer.
Unless you have a really old scanner that uses a parallel or serial port,
I'd doubt that the issue is data transfer from the scanner to the computer.
Typically, it is
Laurie,
Don't worry about it. You will know for the future.
And all the time I've been on this list, I was unaware of that as well, but
in all honesty, I didn't really give it much thought...
I received both this post,
Peter's post, and your original post at the same time ( nemaely 9/18/03
Hi Laurie,
Given the new information, I would say that Austin needs to update his
familiarity with VueScan as well since much of the discussion appears to
involve Vuescan since that is what many of his fellow debaters are using.
You are correct that I (and apparently you as well ;-) weren't
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Henk,
I have several images on my web photo galleries who gave me a
headache with
posterisations in the (monochromatic) blue skies while editing.
How do you know the original scanner data is any good?
A photo editing program working with 16 bit/channel and feeding
it with the
maximum
Hi Rob,
Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying this applies when using Vuescan - especially with negs?
That is probably how every filmscanner that you or I would
use, works... The issue is the software (and possibly hardware), and
how it allows you to control
Frank,
By low end scanners, do you mean something like the Polaroid SS4000?
Because VueScan produces much better scans than Polacolor Insight.
Viewscan, nor Insight, nor any scanner software produces the scans, the
scanner and the scanner operator does. Perhaps it's true that for someone
who
Frank,
Arguing
for 8bits is just plain silly.
Silly is one word, sophistry is another.
Well, in one word, arguing against using 8 bit/channel color shows
ignorance.
Do you have an image that you can show me that is lacking because it had
tonal manipulation done in 8 bits, oh, and
Frank,
Arguing
for 8bits is just plain silly.
Silly is one word, sophistry is another.
Well, in one word, arguing against using 8 bit/channel color shows
ignorance.
Do you have an image that you can show me that is lacking because it had
tonal manipulation done in 8 bits, oh, and plus the
then look at it and see what it has marked for
removal.
Bob Frost.
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The IR data is simply a fourth channel, and could
easily be passed on if designed to do so
Frank,
Perhaps it's true that for someone who wants the software to
simply hand then a scan, Viewscan does a better job at
automating the process.
And I presume you think this is me? How condescending.
Frank, did I say that was you? No, I didn't. Don't read things into what I
say that
Hi David,
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.
Some of the scanner software has film profiling, and I've done quite a bit
of work with it, unfortunately, that only
Hi Rob,
You should either get raw data from the scanner, or do the
setpoints/tonal
curves correctly in the scanner software. Keep in mind,
every time you
re-do setpoints/tonal curves, you are degrading the data. It's just a
fact
of how setpoints/tonal curves work. What the
Hi Robert,
save scanner corrected TIF (16 bit)
...scanner corrected...16 bit... Does your scanner allow setpoints and
correction to high bit data? What scanner is it? This is not a property of
the software, but of the scanner hardware/firmware.
Can I assume that the RAW scan is just
Robert,
You
are telling me that there is no point in using 16 bit, yet working
with grayscale there is!
Grayscale only has one channel, and the TOTAL number of bits available is
only 8 bits per pixel, for 8 bit grayscale. For color, there are three
color channels available, and therefore the
Oh Robert,
Austin Franklin wrote:
I believe you're missing the point. It doesn't matter if you
have a color
file that has 100 bits/color, you simply aren't visually
capable (because
you are a human) of seeing a difference between that and an 8 bits/color
file. It has nothing to do
Grayscale only has one channel, and the TOTAL number of bits
available is
only 8 bits per pixel, for 8 bit grayscale. For color, there are three
color channels available, and therefore the TOTAL number of
bits per pixel
is actually TWENTY-FOUR using 8 bit/color pixels, instead of simply
I would hardly call your position enlightened. You've got
clear misunderstanding of some of the concepts here, as well
as apparent lack of experience. If I were you, given what
I've read here, I'd strongly suggest you either try to learn
something, instead of try to rationalize your
Hi Rob,
I dispute the claim that
if you have
to do a significant amount of adjustment after scanning that you haven't
done it right. It depends on the circumstances.
Hum. Obviously, I disagree, and note, it's not just after scanning but
after scanning and letting the scanner do setpoints
trying out a Minolta
5400, and
the 16bit files are 233 MB! I might just accept your argument and
reduce the
size of my files back to about 100MB by converting to 8bit.
Bob Frost.
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exactly, but to claim that you need
Hi Preston,
Great post, thanks...but again, I MUST stress, that Margulis is specifically
talking about COLOR images, NOT BW, and that distinction is VERY important.
Regards,
Austin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Preston Earle
Sent:
...It doesn't apply to computer-generated
images with gradients, tints, etc., either.
Preston Earle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can you scan those with a film scanner?
;-)
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL
Hi Ramesh,
A two pixel camera will give you a perfectly sharp image. Sharpness is no
indication of image fidelity (ability to reproduce accurately). It also
depends on your scanner and your film and a whole lot of other things...
Regards,
Austin
Hi,
Take a picture using 6MP DSLR at full
Berry,
What I want to know is: which one will make a better 11x14 or
12x16 print?
That depends on what characteristics of an image YOU like. No one else can
tell you what YOU might think is better (except your wife ;-).
Regards,
Austin
Hi Robert,
Austin Franklin wrote:
It really depends on if you are talking color or BW. For BW,
there is no
question, you need to use 16 bits for doing all but a minimum
tonal curve
adjustment, but for color, for most applications you won't see any
difference using 8 bit data or 16 bit
Robert,
Yes - 8 bit does work fine for most images, but if
you really want to throw an image into some editing,
then relying on 8 bits is foolhardy if you can get
more to work with.
BUT...you really don't GET 16 bits. You get 10, 12 or 13, and even if you
*think* you get 14, you really
Andreas,
Austin Franklin wrote:
Its well documented in the 3D community that having
24 bit colour internally in 3D processing engines
can result in banding in certain scenes, and thats
why Nvidia and ATI have developed 32 bit engines,
and more.
That's an entirely different issue.
I
Hi Art,
...and that's even concluding that the scanner is really
capturing the full 16 bit depth, which many do not.
I'm not sure ANY do. Do you know of a scanner that really has a usable 16
bits of data for each color? I know a few (and only a very few from what
I've seen) *claim* 16 bits,
It really depends on if you are talking color or BW. For BW, there is no
question, you need to use 16 bits for doing all but a minimum tonal curve
adjustment, but for color, for most applications you won't see any
difference using 8 bit data or 16 bit data.
Austin
-Original Message-
Ed,
What I wonder is... how many of you do your adjustments
in 16 vs 8bit,
As a note, when you do tonal curves using your scanner driver, the curves
are done to high bit data, even though you save it as 8 bit data. That is
why I suggest that tonal curves be done in the driver (if the tools
I'm new to scanning, using a Nikon 4000ED on PC. I've been scanning in
14bit mode, doing some cleanup and adjustments, and resaving as 16bit
TIFF masters. What I wonder is... how many of you do your adjustments
in 16 vs 8bit, and does it matter for final quality either way? Also,
Hi David,
I haven't tried the Portra films yet, but Reala's clearly worse
than Provia
for grain noise
That is going to be scanner dependant. On my scanner, that does not appear
to be an issue, but yes, I have heard/seen grain noise from other people.
It appears that most 2700SPI scanners
Wow, it certainly doesn't seem easy to unsubscribe :) Could
someone be so kind
as to tell me how. I thought I followed list server instructions,
but no luck.
Doesn't the text below this give you the recommended method of
unsubscribing? Note it says listserver@... not filmscanners@..., so
I'm kidding... I am also surprised by the results. The drum scan does
show a lot more resolution than his Imacon scan. And the close up shows
that there is no detail on the windows from the digital while the film
has a good amount.
I don't think he's denying that. His (Michael R.'s) point
PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Austin Franklin
Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 6:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: [filmscanners_Digest]
filmscanners DigestforFri 17 Jan, 2003
I have found
...but why would a PMT
get more
light,
In semiconductor sensors, however, many, perhaps most, of the
photons that hit the junction do absolutely nothing, so they're much less
sensitive.
Hi Paul,
Id believe that PMTs have a much lower noise floor than CCDs and that is
the reason for the
Karl,
That's not how the Foveon chip works. There are no filters. They
are taking
advantage of the fact that different light frequencies have
different depth
penetrations into silicon.
Well, yes and no...but anyway, filtering HAS to take place, or you could not
distinguish between RGB.
Hi Bill,
So, my HP Photosmart is a consumer grade product, but I
have problems with the arcane concept. What makes it
arcane. Is the scanner so primitive as to be worthless?
No, arcane doesnt mean worthless. The scanner might work just fine. I
said arcane because its a scanner that not
Bob Geoghegan had a good reason for scanning in B W... i've
always scanned
in RGB...
Shunith,
Just as a note, your film scanner ALWAYS (unless it's a Leafscan ;-) scans
in RGB no matter whether the data returned to you is converted to grayscale
or left as RGB.
I take it you are referring
Hi Paul,
...However, even in 8-bit mode, having a
10-bit DAC is useful because it keeps the color lookup table curves from
introducing posterization through round-off errors.
If it's 8 bit data, you are feeding the DAC only 8 bits, if you are using a
10 bit DAC, then the lower two bits are
... Anthony's claim that handling more memory
than an individual instruction can access is both
innefficient and difficult is wrong on both
counts.
Try processing tables that straddle address-space boundaries, and you'll
see.
Anthony,
I don't know who wrote what program you believe
Anthony,
Most of what is printed on paper in the world doesn't pass
through a printer
driver on a PC or Mac.
Naw. MOST of what is printed on paper in the world DOES pass through a
printer driver on a PC or a Mac, simply because there are MILLIONS and
MILLIONS of homeowners and corporate PCs
Hi David,
'Doze, Anthony's claim that
handling more memory than an individual instruction can access is both
innefficient and difficult is wrong on both counts. Accessing the whole of
the address space from every instruction is hideously inefficient. Most
machines provide modes where a base
Anthohy,
As you aren't a hardware engineer, it makes
sense that you don't understand how this works,
and the real issues involved.
I've known exactly how it works for several decades now.
Oh really?
Austin
Hi Paul,
Yes, passing the 8 bit data through an 8 bit LUT would cause gaps/combining
in anything but a linear/monotonic LUT (1:1)...it simply has to, which is
the same reason to do tonal manipulations in a larger space.
The video card includes a 256-entry lookup table (for each color)
which
Anthony,
CMYK is very intimately related to
scanning.
Really? How so? What about it do you need to know to scan better?
I believe nothing. There is nothing in making your scan that you can do
differently given an intimate knowledge of CMYK or NO knowledge of it. If
there is, please name
Hi Paul,
Obviously, this isn't the case in the 64-bit versions of Windows for the
Alpha...
Er, I don't believe there is a 64 bit Windows for Alpha...
Austin
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with
Anthony,
The mistake engineers make is in believing that address spaces will be
allocated sequentially starting with byte zero and ending with byte 2^N-1.
But that's not how it actually works. Engineers tend to assume
that a given
address space has more space than anyone will ever need and
, Paul D. DeRocco
Paulmailto:pderocco;ix.netcom.com
From: Austin Franklin
Naw. MOST of what is printed on paper in the world DOES pass through a
printer driver on a PC or a Mac, simply because there are MILLIONS and
MILLIONS of homeowners and corporate PCs
Tony,
CCD sensors
can now achieve 14 stops range,
What full frame imaging CCD sensors do that in a normal camera? There are
some that if you actively cool them, and control their environment, you
might get that kind of response from them...but that's not really a usable
device for a
As both you and Henning suggested, based upon review of my files, my
suggestion of mold growth at over 30% humidity was too conservative.
After doing a scan of my physical paper files, I found my memory had
failed me, as a reference by Kodak regarding preventing fungal growth on
films
I'm curious if you have any references on that. I've not had any mold
growth, and it seems quite comfortable...and as I said, no
camera, equipment
etc. problems at all. It's been a most palatable environment. The
dehumidifier is off during winter, probably from October to April.
I also have a dehumidifier in my lab...I can't say if that
helps a lot or
not, but I don't have any dust problems on my stored film. On
film I simply
leave lying around, perhaps.
Actually, a moderate humidity level keeps dust levels down, by reducing
static, and by making the dust
in the
scanner (LS-2000), and find there's still crap all over them
if I turn off
ICE.
--
Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Austin Franklin
Well, I'd say if you want the best results from any scanner,
simply keep
your
Henning,
SCSI is often not logical when connections get a bit complicated, or
even when they're simple. On my last computer I had 4 SCSI chains; 2
simple ones allowing 7 devices and 2 of the 15 device kind. Some
combinations needed termination in the middle,
There is never any reason to
Tom,
The input is a SCSI 1 cable (50 pin) the output (to another SCSI
device) is
25 pin.
I believe either can be used to connect to the SCSI card.
Austin
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with
that there was a type in
the instructions. Both cables were okay so I don't know what the problem
might be.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 3:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
Hi Tom,
...my SCSI card is device 7 (the maximum) thus
auto termination is working.
You know that device ID number and auto termination aren't linked at all.
The SCSI device ID can be anything, the order only matters for boot if you
don't specify a specific device to boot from...at least
But ignoring valid points is precisely
what you do, and if you disagree I will happily repost many
items you have
never answered. Would you like me to do that?
Julian
I kinda would. I'd like to see exactly where you each stand at this point.
Damn, Toddyou REALLY want to talk
Roy,
All the stuff about number of levels and resolution are
artifacts of the
digital process and not part of the DyR concept which existed
way before
the word digital was even coined.
...
I believe the concept of resolution is inherent in the concept
of dynamic
range. Whether
1 - 100 of 723 matches
Mail list logo
