It would get irritating, Ed.
You do good work!
Hersch
At 03:30 AM 11/24/2001, you wrote:
In a message dated 11/24/2001
6:05:20 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I think someone just quoted Nikon's own manual in one of the
groups
> (maybe this one) and it stated that the LED brightness was
alte
Nikon might be approaching the limits of linearity in the LEDs. They
also need to be able to have a range of brightness available to them for
the "analog exposure" they offer. Since Blue LEDs are (or at least
were) the least bright, they might be the limiting factor.
Art
Julian Robinson wro
In a message dated 11/21/2001 8:07:15 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Nikon might be approaching the limits of linearity in the LEDs. They
> also need to be able to have a range of brightness available to them for
> the "analog exposure" they offer.
No, Nikon scanners don't vary the bri
Mikael - thanks for this useful info. It is interesting that the different
generations of scanners have the same depth of field although they have
totally different optics. Means that Nikon must be holding a firm line
against other constraints (such as LED brightness).
Cheers
Julian
At 20:1
etter in LS4000 than LS2000.
Best regards
Mikael Risedal
>From: Julian Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Canon 4000 scanner VS Nikon LS4000 >Mikael
>Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:30:16 +1100
>
>Mik
