syllables :-), the samples and more info are here:
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~markthomasz/problems/blackpt.htm
(As it may affect your decision to visit, it's about a 270K download altogether.)
Thanks for any enlightenment..
mark t
Tony wrote:
(markthomasz..) wrote:
I've noticed that on some
Tony wrote:
Naturally I have received a complaint..
only *one*...!
..text about new list arrangements neatly clipped
..I trust this new, enlightened structure meets the requirements of all list
participants.
I *would* heartily endorse this.. but it's Saturday and I'm out of the office..
(and
not necessarily the one suggested by conventional wisdom!) solved the problem. In
some cases multi-scanning may well be the solution - in the case of the Acer, and I
suspect the Polaroid, I doubt it. But the only way to know is to try..
mark t
Without removing the film from the mount, is there any simple way to identify a K25
from a K64?
I guess I could project them right up and compare grain, but I'm not sure even that
will tell me.. The ones I wish to identify are cardboard mounted, processed in
Australia (Melbourne I think),
call up the appropriate settings when you change carriers - it does on mine (Thanks
Ed!). So if all you want is two sets of options, for negs v slides, you're already
covered..
mark t
At 10:16 PM 2/02/02, you wrote:
Hi everybody,
on my combo (Athlon 900, Win98SE, Nikon LS-40) I cannot load
I just asked a very similar question here, on photo.net..
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001tSp
Certainly Norman Koren's site at:
http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html
is worth a long look..
regards mt
At 08:53 PM 19/01/02, you wrote:
Calibration is a
for over 200
tranny types, I can't select any of them.
If you look carefully, you'll see they are all color negatives or bw, not
transparency..
regards, mark t
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED
(Any further responses to this should probably go to me off list - so as
not to clog it at a bad time.. :)
For anyone else who is interested in this printer, I found 2 enlightening
links.. but still no review from a 'real' photographer who has used one.
complain about the current price.. :-)
mark t
Maris wrote:
Neat Image is a digital filter designed to reduce visible noise in
digital photographic images.
http://absoft.nm.ru/
It presently supports only JPG and BMP files so you will have to convert
from TIFF to BMP first, but I wrote them
FWIW my experiments with the demo of this software left me *very* cold.
It seems quite effective on patterned images (eg flatbed scans from
textured paper). However, I found it to have little benefit on normal
grain - when it was adjusted up enough to be any 'better' than the usual
grain
about the possibility of giving out an
image with a slight cast I had missed because of my 'affliction' - this
product has really made a difference to me - so I apologise if I sound like
a sales person..
mark t
Tris, you wrote:
I agree the plug-in seems the way to go, assuming the stand-alone
more than one user.
If you are having a problem that is Vuescan's fault, there's a good chance
others on this list will quickly back you up, and I'm sure Ed will sort
it. In the meantime, drop back to the version you were happy with...
mark t
there
until the moment that it changes - then when we see the actual 'switch'
take place I think we will quickly get the hang of the relationship between
the numbers and the graph.
mark t
PS - I find it hard to believe we are all sitting here having our
needs/wants met by a software developer
..!?
Now to start playing with it.. :)
mark t
Roger wrote:
... Digital River charged me more than Pictographics quoted and they did
so without notifying me..
or
colorblind perspective. My feeling is I probably don't need the features
of the Pro version, which makes it a *very* cheap (US$40) solution to most
of my c-b problems.
Thanks, mark t
One small bug, Ed, or maybe it is just me?
When I try to *tab* from one field to the next, eg from Black to White
Point, the focus jumps to the preview window instead..
Otherwise, I really like the new layout. Well done!
mt
Sorry to go off-topic, but now might a good time - just in case anyone on
the list does not keep up-to-date with virus information:
If you use MS Outlook, or MS Outlook Express to read your mail, be
afraid! There are now viruses that will attack your PC *just by you
reading the mail*. It
on my spare PC grin
mark t.
Ed wrote:
..
Why does my image change so dramatically between white point 0.001 and
0?
It's a bug - zero was being treated as the same as setting
Color|Color balance to None. I've fixed this, and will
release it in 7.2.11.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Maybe a dumb question (I'm tired).. :-)
Why does my image change so dramatically between white point 0.001 and
0? When tweaking white point, I find I get small useful changes down to
0.001, but if I try to go lower or to zero, the image suddenly drops VERY
dramatically in brightness/gamma.
cynical in my old age.. Sigh. :)
mark t
At 09:44 AM 21/11/01 -0500, you wrote:
I have an Acer ScanWit 2720S and Epson 1270 printer, and I'm using
Photoshop 5.
Ditto here.
...All of the prints I've made so far, color and BW, exhibit excessive
grain. I'm told that it isn't really grain, and I agree that it
probably isn't since it
For an estimated 13,000+ UK pounds, I think I would be wanting at least
4Kx4K pixels :-)
Yes, the DCS Pro back is definitely a 16Mp device. Try here for a quick
summary:
http://photo.askey.net/news/0009/00091901kodakproback.asp
Harvey wrote:
But aren't those really just 4000 x 4000
Austin wrote:
...
I would conclude, without any
further information, that is does use a color quad, and does interpolate the
color information as was speculated in the other post.
BTW, it would be 2000 x 2000, not 1000 x 1000... ;-)
So, pro photographers are being asked to pay an extortionate
Just for the record, for those who don't use *studio* flashlighting,
*on-camera* flashguns rarely drop below 1/500 second flash duration, as
Dave said. (Just checked 3 different flashgun manuals to make sure my
memory serves correctly..)
In fact, the cheaper and smaller the flash, generally
..
Hope this is of some use - if anyone wishes to discuss issues off-list,
feel free.
Regards to all combatants (er I mean list members :-), mark t
mt
Why not take a copy of Vuescan with you and output a Raw file, you could
then take the Raw file home and open it within Vuescan for more heavyweight
testing.
Just a thought.
Thanks Richard - a *good* thought - I will.
Given the extraordinary differences in colour balance that I get out of
shouldn't be
strenuously avoided at all costs. I think members of the list (esp newer
ones) should find out for themselves what low-res prints look like, before
locking their brains into the 240-and-above zone.
Just more of that 'variable mileage' we all get, I guess! :-)
mark t
PROTECTED] :)
Requesting a return receipt can help if you need to verify your claims later..
Good luck.
mark t
At 11:09 PM 23/10/01 -0400, David wrote:
By the way, does anyone know how to email Minolta?
At 04:06 AM 21/10/01 -0600, Bill wrote:
...
o The JPEG standard includes a lossless setting. Photoshop 6 supports it:
set the quality level to 12. it will compress to, say, 1/3 of the original
size. JPEG only supports 24-bit images.
G'day Bill.
I had never heard of a lossless JPG, so I
Apart from the problems already listed, namely:
- newton rings (you will definitely want the anti-newton-glass type, IMO)
- possible degradation of image due to extra surfaces
- more potential to gather dust, and more effort to remove
.. may I add these - as a person who tried them for a while
it a year or two, and then like you I will be jumping ship. That
still leaves all those boxes of negatives and slides that I already have,
sadly..
mark t
At 03:19 PM 15/09/01 -0400, Dale wrote:
Doesn't anyone use Photoshop's Dust and Scratch filter?
I find it useful in cleaning up dirty scans, and automated selections
using the magic wand and color range tools.
Up until recently I would just clone away dust spots, as I didn't like the
unwanted
sizes and
good looking prints. I can just pick the difference between 240 and 300+
dpi, but at normal viewing distances it is irrelevant. Your eyesight,
fussiness and mileage may vary of course.. :)
mark t
Ps - Who is about to sign off, because of the traffic generated by the 'aa
bait'. I'll
I usually monitor OT messages in the hope I might see something worthwhile,
but I am giving up on this one as flogged *well* beyond death.
:-(
Am I alone in my fervent desire that OT discussions should go 'OL' after a
sensible period?
sigh
mt
.. who doesn't claim to be a professional
the supplier to call me in when he
gets one...
I know Tony was keen to try this printer, so I wait with baited breath for
his comments..
mark t
* And yes I checked with a number of 'un-protanopic' friends!
At 10:37 PM 6/09/01 +1200, Colin wrote:
Tony wrote:
Printing them well is another matter however
At 10:56 AM 3/09/01 -0400, Mike wrote:
Maris wrote:
The developer Ed Hamrick also suggests using Image for slide film.
Under what circumstances should Image be used?
If you want deep shadow detail.
And I find the Slide setting also may result in burnt highlights..
mark t
(please do not read on if offended by weak humour)
At 01:35 PM 30/08/01 -0700, Dean, then Jawed wrote:
Some of the problems include dividing by zero
So this *doesn't* give an infinitely better image? :)
It definitely isn't rocket science we're seeing here.
..And he said it without a
. If it is a dead'un, back it goes.
I'm happy to clone dust away, but I draw the line at lines... So if you
are over fussy, you are nevertheless not alone :)
mark t
At 03:04 AM 30/08/01 -0700, Art wrote:
My second unit also suffers from duff or lazy pixel sensors on the CCD.
Some have implied I am
choice if you want to compare other stuff, eg fleshtones.)
Regards, Mark T.
At 03:30 PM 28/08/01 +1000, you wrote:
Just a thought - I don't know the guts of how Photoshop produces histograms,
so this may not work as well as I think it could... Would it be a useful
comparison of scanners to scan
Ooops. Apologies to list members for more clutter. It was *meant* to be
offlist..
..old age approacheth!..
mark t
At 07:51 PM 28/08/01 +0930, Mark T slipped up and wrote:
offlist
G'day rob.
etc..
? Then those who are completely disinterested (or is it just
me?) can trash the messages with nary a glance...
mark t
At 11:46 AM 27/08/01 +0200, you wrote:
Can you guarantee that every one of my applications will run on it without
change? How do I support my 1800 Type 1 fonts, for example? How
),
but I discovered it was then easier to load the slides, and the side clips
hold it quite adequately. ..so I broke the other 3 off..
mark t
At 09:55 PM 16/08/01 -0400, Johnny wrote:
Hi Lynn,
Do you have problems loading slides into your ScanWit or is it just
me? I'd been using mine just
with you, and I'm sure your prints are great!
mark t
At 09:25 PM 7/08/01 +1000, you wrote:
Mark T. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have a 4000dpi scanner, probably. But I find with 2700 dpi, the
grain-aliasing makes it harder to get good enlargements (8x10 and up) off
negs.
Really Mark? You can't
supposedly strong in this area.
One bottom line question is - Are the current generation of neg stocks so
good as
to rival trani for repro work?
If you have a 4000dpi scanner, probably. But I find with 2700 dpi, the
grain-aliasing makes it harder to get good enlargements (8x10 and up) off negs.
mark t.
sharpening. Without wins hands down. Sharpening is
definitely softer than without. Strange
Very strange! I'm using 7.1.7/Scanwit also, but it works as
advertised. Are you using the grain reduction at the same time perhaps?
mark t
and then..)
mark t
Hi, Jawed - interesting pages, thanks for the effort.
Have you looked at the slides through a loupe or projector to see how much
detail was actually lost? I know this is all a bit subjective, but am
curious whether there was much more to be resolved - some of the images did
indeed look as
, I've posted samples here..
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~markthomasz/burnt.htm
Mark T.
is particularly bright :) or the
unit is calibrated differently to most.
I only have real trouble with noise and g-a in the light areas of film, so
it doesn't help me much.
Mark T.
At 12:22 PM 21/07/01 -0400, Ed wrote:
My experience has been that multiscanning doesn't help
underexposed negatives at all
At 10:48 AM 20/07/01 +, Lynn wrote:
OK, I'm not exactly sure what's going on here, that one display set to
factory specs (mine) shows posterization in an Internet JPEG, and two
others (Rafe's and Bob's) do not.
Should Internet picture postings come with the caveat, Warning, This
Picture
to add some banding/jaggie samples.)
If anyone else wants to contribute or make suggestions on other defects I
should try to document, feel free.
In the meantime, Pete's site at http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Grain.htm
has some good g-a samples and explanations.
Mark T.
At 02:29 PM 19/07/01
Methinks someone may have missed the point of Dan Margulis' style..
As a 'disabled' person myself (perhaps not moronic, but pretty close), I
find Dan a breath of fresh air, and what's more, he actually deals with my
problem...
Yes, I am R/G colorblind. :( A nasty affliction if you enjoy
At 09:36 PM 13/07/01 -0600, Frank wrote:
..you are just seeing a shadow effect where the slide
mount is blocking only some of the light path along the edge.
Yup, I took a couple and looked at them under a microscope at low power and
what you describe is definitely what is happening - one side
At 02:20 PM 13/07/01 -0600, Frank wrote:
Questions: (from a scanning perspective)
1. Should I be using cheap film/processing during this learning phase or is
this a bad thing which will cause me to develop bad habits?
I think your approach is fine. The only drawback is that if you're like
me,
Unless your Pakons are a lot more transparent than mine, I doubt it, but I
would await some more knowledgable responses.
IMHO, I think that you are just seeing a shadow effect where the slide
mount is blocking only some of the light path along the edge. The Pakon
mount I am currently looking
I didn't see anything attached to the post either..
As a 1270 owner who hasn't really done much experimenting yet to see if it
has a sweet spot, I wouldn't mind trying them out, if Jack wants to try
again or give a web-reference..?
MT
At 09:05 PM 10/07/01 -0700, you wrote:
Jack Phipps
going
over 75 ppi..!! :)(Hey, try it before you disagree!)
Mark T, now ducking for cover..
At 07:22 AM 6/07/01 +0100, Derek wrote:
Er how do you know? Have you tried it?
It's interesting, because this is a flatbed that's snuck onto the market
with a built in proper transparency lid, 2400x4800dpi optical resolution
and 48 bits colour depth. This is an incredible spec for a flatbed,
, but it has absolutely no detectable effect on my
images. Like you said, if it isn't causing a problem on real images, I
wouldn't fret too much :) I suspect scanning blank frames and winding
up/down the levels would reveal terrifying looking faults in a lot of
scanners..
Mark T.
Interesting, but couldn't *also* help but notice the page on the Minolta
Dimage 7 digital camera.
5.2 Mp, lens equivalent to a 28-200, and US$1499.
Those specs numbers are beginning to sound almost interesting, even to a
skinflint like me...
MarkT
From: Shough, Dean
Sent: Wednesday, June
you not scan a blank frame to get a
'profile' of it, then reverse that, maybe blur it a bit, and apply it to
your image in Photoshop/whatever? Not a nice addition to your workflow
(and ask someone *else* how to do it quickly!), but once you got the hang
of it..
Mark T.
..who reckons all
Someone else will have to comment on the Minolta, but my experience with
the Acer Scanwit is that it is perfectly capable of pin-sharp 8x10 prints
from slides. I have printed some of my slides to A3 (16x11) with excellent
results also. The Acer suffers from grain-aliasing on negative film,
At 09:16 AM 1/05/01 +0200, Jerry wrote:
..
I noticed that the HP S20 software was able to paint e.g. in red all pixels
that were being clipped by current histogram mapping settings. To me this
seemed a handy feature, but no other software took over that idea.
It seems that if you can show the
At 01:42 AM 24/04/01 -0700, you wrote:
I want to clarify if the striping I am seeing..
Yes, I see exactly the same effect in the same places, but quite subtle. If
you run an eyedropper over the areas, you can see a small variation in the
RGB numbers to back it up. So neither of you are
At 04:44 PM 20/04/01 +0200, you wrote:
am new to the filmscanner world..
We all are or were! :)
I'm considering either the Acer Scanwit 2720s or the 2740s. My perception
after reading the specs, is that the 2740s is 2720s+ICE. Did I miss
anything?
As Art has pointed out, the 2740 also uses a
I guess you've probably got a few replies already, but here's another!
Try here:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IRNEWS/archive/current.htm#Nikf
Regards, Mark T.
At 07:40 PM 8/04/01 -0700, you wrote:
I just resubscribed to the list today after months of ISP problems. Would
someone please
Kodachromes in cardboard mounts are often like this -
you may have to look harder to find a plastic-mounted one with a good
bend.. Sorry if I am stating the obvious. :)
Regards, Mark T.
is curved. If a scanner has so little
depth of field that I have to add to my workload, well.. It's not so much
that I am blaming the scanner manufacturer - I am just exercising my right
to exclude that scanner from my next purchase decision. :)
Regards, Mark T.
At 10:06 PM 6/04/01 -0400, you wrote:
Review of the new Nikon CoolScan 4000 at the Imaging Resource Newsletter:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IRNEWS/
Interesting article, but I start to question it when I read:
quote
In all our prior film scanner reviews, the highest resolution we'd
that the depth of field is just about right, maybe 0.4mm (?)
as a wild guess..
Regards, Mark T.
==
Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
so (to me off-list) quickly!
Regards, Mark T.
==
Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
At 01:48 PM 5/04/01 -0400, you wrote:
What part and how big a part would resolution and reproduction size play
in this scenario? Inquiring minds want to know. :-)
...misregistration of the separate IR pass is
purely theoretical -- Ed Hamrick and Acer have confirmed that it *could*
happen, but
users
off-list to see if we agree on some issues that we think could be improved.
If any other Acerer's are out there and wish to join in, give me a tingle,
but off-list.
Now, I wonder if a Nikon rep might appear.. :)
Look forward to talking to you, Honda.
Regards, Mark T.
At 02:09 PM 3/04/01
At 09:43 AM 4/04/01 +1000, Rob wrote:
OK, but as I mentioned earlier - we're talking about *negatives*
where this problem is most evident, not transparencies, so the
colour the CCD sees isn't blue at all.
Does anyone know whether the grain sizes vary with the dye
colour?
Yes, they certainly do.
and painless way of
transferring a piece of film from a glued cardboard mount into a glass
slide And, for that matter, a recommendation for glass slides that
REALLY don't suffer from Newton's rings. My experience is that even those
that are supposedly Newton-proof generally are not.
Mark T
At 07:01
don't have a
major dust problem. (And I actually like 'cloning'. It's sort of like
meditation...:)
Regards, Mark T.
At 10:19 PM 31/03/01 -0800, you wrote:
The Acer 2740 with digital ICE is the cheapest option. It is an
improvement over the HP both in shadow detail and resolution (CCD chip
At 07:00 PM 30/03/01 -0500, you wrote:
I was the first to answer this question and now I question myself for
letting this go on this long.
And I too apologise for dragging it on, but hopefully it will end with this
one. The only reason I quote the following is that I still see some folk
under
So Dicky, let me get this quite straight. It's OK for you to post a
completely worthless comment about Unix, because you're just testing the
moderator..
But if someone else goes off-topic they get a public insult and a request
to Tony. In my not-so-humble, but non-insulting (!) opinion,
Thank you Tony. *Much* appreciated!
And to Dicky's 'supporter', while I agree that sometimes a break in the
routine of messages can be entertaining, we should ALL remember that this
is a public forum. Anything you wouldn't say loudly in a public place
(with a police occifer nearby! :), should
Take a look at the Photoscientia site, www.photoscientia.co.uk.
As for me..(amateur opinion follows!)
I have the Acer 2720, and I like it very much. Neutral, slightly
undersaturated colors (a very slight cyan/blue cast on mine, easy to
correct). Good shadow detail and very little shadow noise
use the stuff.
And Art wrote:
Wilhelm does have some discussion of HP's wide carriage inks on his charts.
Is there another Wilhelm? I've visited www.wilhelm-research.com many times
recently (and again just then) and there is still no 'update'.. they just
keep changing the date!
Mark T.
The Konica VX-400 I have in my fridge says Made in Japan - but I'm in
Australia, so who knows.. (Before you ask I haven't tried it yet.)
We have a few supermarket brands down here, and it seems to be always 'Made
in Germany', so I had assumed it was Agfa..?
I didn't think 3M were still in the
Do I get an award for worst grammar for that sentence? ;)
Mark T.
==
Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
this change from Ed? If anyone else on the
list also thinks this is a good idea, please say so now!
Mark T.
l splendor of 1600 x 1200 pixel screen
It had never occurred to me, but now that you mention it, I reckon that's
what Frank is leading up to... ;-)
http://www.size.does.matter.com
I couldn't resist but to click on this, and hey, it's available (at a price)!
Anyway, back to film-scanning, perhaps..?
their info around!
I am only interested in collecting the browser/resolution/color depth info
because I work with many web pages and I always test the pages on the most
common platforms/setups.
Regards, Mark T.
==
Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http
Lyn A wrote:
Alan W wrote:
On slides it's mostly a moot point unless they are underexposed. clip
Also Kodachrome is a denser slide generally, which can drop shadows too low
for many scanners to distinguish properly.
I've found that my Scanwit 2720S does a really good job on well-exposed
slides
At 05:12 PM 7/03/01 -0500, John wrote:
Read an interesting article about Applied Science Fiction's ROC
technology of restoring color of old pictures, indicating that it makes
its restoration on the basis of distinct patterns of grain-change for
different film stocks. I assume that this doesn't
in
the past - now I can attack them with method rather than madness!
Mark T.
At 11:18 PM 26/02/01 -0600, you wrote:
Read any of Dan Margulis's "Professional Photoshop x" books. You can read
Chapter 2 - By the Numbers, which describes the procedure in detail and in a
nutshell (though i
89 matches
Mail list logo
