On Sat, 19 May 2001 16:16:16 -0400 Johnny Deadman
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Tone to me is the look of a correctly exposed non t-grain bw 4x5
negative
developed using a compensating developer and printed on unglazed glossy
FB
paper. Quite what that has to do with chroma and hue angle
Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote:
Flatbeds can and have been used for macro photography and to great
advantage, and to create original works of art as well. Just protect the
glass surface.
Maris
Now, you really are giving the store away. ;-) Much of my original
artwork of the last year
Steve wrote:
Ok it will be approx US $7000 but hopefully the consumer stuff will
eventually follow on.
That's a pretty big hit, AFAIC. You can buy several Leicas for that amount.
Even a professional will look very closely at that sort of high-ticket
item--it has to start paying off very
on 5/19/01 8:30 AM, Steve Greenbank at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See this :
http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2001-05/2001_05_17_dcs_760.html
and in particular this : (be warned it's 1.4M)
http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/dcs760_bw_portrait.jpg
well, it's very very sharp
Lynn: You make some good points relative to the camera. There are other
factors too that an amateur must consider. One biggy is the storage capacity of
digital cameras. That is getting better but it still has not reached the point
where the chips will hold a lot of tiff images. The image
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 4:56 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding
|
|
| Alan Tyson wrote:
|
| Just to add an alternative, broader view to the
| discussion
|
| I
On Fri, 18 May 2001 10:22:38 -0400 (EDT) Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
I'm starting to think, Hey, this
filmscanning stuff might just catch on!
Yes. I recently did some shots, informal contre-jour portraits of a guy
during an interview. He was indoors, back to the window, sunny day
If you (John Brownlow below) could talk in terms of digital imaging
terms, maybe I could understand precisely what you are talking about.
The word tone means almost anything, depending on the background of
the individual.
What I would like www.robgalbraith.com to post is the gamut breadth
on 5/19/01 2:46 PM, Richard N. Moyer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you (John Brownlow below) could talk in terms of digital imaging
terms, maybe I could understand precisely what you are talking about.
The word tone means almost anything, depending on the background of
the individual.
Tony wrote:
This is exactly why I got into scanning, to expand the range of
possibilities. Filmscanners and software are now powerful enough tools to
easily surpass what conventional darkrooms can achieve in most respects.
clip
And of course, hardest of the lot, taking
a decent photo in the
--Original Message--
From: Johnny Deadman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Filmscanners [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: May 19, 2001 3:42:17 PM GMT
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding
on 5/19/01 8:30 AM, Steve Greenbank at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See this :
http://www.robgalbraith.com
For the last several days I've been going back to my roots vis a vis
archiving; scanning old prints again, instead of old negs or slides.
Although I've read Tony's and others' comments on the differences in dynamic
range etc., I'd never really noticed it so much before. Like, with flat
scanning,
A friend gave me a set of prints and negatives this week to use in an article
for a newsletter publication. The prints were pale, low contrast and very
little color saturation. My friend asked me what he had done wrong. Upon
examining the negatives (Kodak Gold), they look to be slightly
There is no doubt in my mind that scanning the negative is far better
than scanning the print.
My list of some reasons to scan from negative rather than print,
accumulated over three years of neg scan experience (and with a
lot of jump-start knowledge from others on the filmscanners list):
You
And, of course, the color gamut of film is greater than that of print.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Bob Shomler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding
| There is no doubt in my mind
Lynn Allen wrote:
For the last several days I've been going back to my roots vis a vis
archiving; scanning old prints again, instead of old negs or slides.
Although I've read Tony's and others' comments on the differences in dynamic
range etc., I'd never really noticed it so much before.
Vai jus esat latvietis?
Karlis Schulmeisters
- Original Message -
From: Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding
And, of course, the color gamut of film is greater than
17 matches
Mail list logo
