Of film recorders yes --- 4K is sort of 4K and the definition does depend on the
size of
the tube and quality of the printer etc. etc..
Having said that an old Polaroid 5000 CI ? 4K or a Mirus Galleria 5K do not give the
results of newer printers these have about a 2.5 tube. The
Well, that's true for XP Home. But, as I understand it, XP Pro is to
replace Win 2k and is in fact NT6. Usually, MS discontinues OS's they've
replaced. But the various W2k Servers are still current, and they still
might sell W2k Pro to placate the inertia of corporations.
Lloyd
-Original
What size computer do I need so that I may work happily with Photoshop and 200M scan
file
size.
I now have a P3 800 / 780M ram + scratch disk. This is using sometimes 3G PShop
memory
and is taking heaps of time to process.
What is the consensus to upgrade to a working configuration?
Austin writes:
10 stops is not hard at all to get in a
single scene.
Examples?
I routinely scan slides in which there is at least some detail at every
point in the image, light and shadow (excluding specular highlights and
light sources)--often more than I realized was there. Clearly, the
Rob writes:
What size computer do I need so that I may
work happily with Photoshop and 200M scan
file size.
The largest and fastest you can afford. Seriously.
RAM is the most important. You should have at least a couple of times as
much RAM as your image size to work at a reasonable
Rob,
XP brings together both former lines of OS's into one. XP Professional
replaces NT and 2000, and XP Home replaces 95/98/ME.
The innards of XP are essentially from the NT/2000 line, while the front end
and media capabilities are from the 98/ME line.
Bob Frost.
Original message:
I don't
I doubt that XP will Win 2K. There is no server version of XP, and Win 2K
Pro is a more compatible desktop for Win 2K server than is XP. XP and 2K
share the same post NT4 code base, from what I understand.
- Original Message -
From: Lloyd O'Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Austin Franklin wrote:
T-Max 100 has a resolution rating of around 200 line pair/mm, that's over
10k samples per inch, and would be a file of APPROXIMATELY FOR EXAMPLE SAKE
(since you are being anal about arithmetic ;-) ~10k x ~15k or ~150M pixels.
Austin
The term Austin is looking
Laurie Solomon wrote:
4K simply means 4000 (and 96) pixels across the 36mm film chip.
Actually, 2889.9ppi.
The problem above is the direction of the film being measured.
A film recorder refers to the longer dimension as 4K, so the 4096 pixels
across, represents the approximate 1 and
Alan Harper wrote:
I have been thinking of switching to Windows--I can't imagine that it is
worse than this. (This is one of about 5 similar problems I am having due
to flakey software and strange interactions between Mac OS X and Classic.)
Only 5, and you're complaining?
Any OS that
If Bill gave everyone who bought all the other garbage OS's his company
has sold them previously a free copy of XP (and maybe compensated
everyone for the wasted hours and days and months of hardship as a
result of those bug-infected vermin he called software) I'd be much
kinder to him. Mr.
Don't ask me why I am refereeing between these two, but I'll make one
stab at it.
Since both people are anal retentive, at least I shouldn't get any sh*t
on me ;-)
I believe what Anthony is saying is that it is rare that a 10 stop
difference would occur in adjacent areas of an image, not that a
Arthur asks:
Scanning reference: has he yet incorporated a
decent color management system into his OS?
Windows XP does indeed include system-level color-management capability,
although it isn't very elaborate. It is apparently not automatic;
applications must explicitly choose to avail
As I recall it was someone who was trying to decide if he should now
jump in and buy a film scanner (now that they were at 4000 dpi) or wait
even longer (he had already waited for 3 years watching the film scanner
progression) until they got even higher resolution and better dynamic range.
So,
How big?
Bigger than a bread box ;-)
Adobe suggests that you should have at least 3-5 times the amount of RAM
memory in your system as the image size to avoid needing the scratch
disk. SO, a gig of memory should be close to doing that. However, the
use of the history pallet in recent PS
Arthur writes:
I believe what Anthony is saying is that
it is rare that a 10 stop difference would
occur in adjacent areas of an image, not that
a full image wouldn't contain a 10 stop range
of contrast.
Actually both. I can't recall offhand seeing a 10-stop range in a single
image,
Ansel Adams would have never been able to do what he did if
scenes regularly
spanned more than ten stops, since even BW film would have great
difficulty
holding any useful detail over that range.
Absolutely not true, Anthony. BW film can easily handle 10 stops, with
very little effort.
T-Max 100 has a resolution rating of around 200 line pair/mm,
that's over
10k samples per inch, and would be a file of APPROXIMATELY FOR
EXAMPLE SAKE
(since you are being anal about arithmetic ;-) ~10k x ~15k or
~150M pixels.
Austin
The term Austin is looking for is anally
Arthur,
Since I'm a BW person (in a photographic sense at least), I
will be using
film for a while.
At least, and, I suspect, in many more ways ;-)
Play nice...
I'm wondering if there are currently available either black and white
digital film backs or or digital cameras. I'd think
10 stops is not hard at all to get in a
single scene.
Examples?
I routinely scan slides
Clearly, the scene
brightness did not span ten stops if I'm able to get anything other than
solid black in the shadows and solid white in the highlights.
Anthony,
But you, your self, have been
Since both people are anal retentive, at least I shouldn't get any sh*t
on me ;-)
Arthur,
There is a difference between being anal retentive and being accurate.
I believe what Anthony is saying is that it is rare that a 10 stop
difference would occur in adjacent areas of an image, not
Austin writes:
BW film can easily handle 10 stops, with
very little effort.
It can _just barely_ handle ten stops, from zero to maximum density. Since
some margin is necessary in order to hold detail, ten stops is potentially
difficult to achieve. Fortunately, it's not generally necessary.
various film recorder factoids
IMO you will not determine the resolution of film by printing from a film printer
there
are too many other factors involved.
Rob
I agree that there are alot of variables, the biggest being that a film recorder must
actually be able to resolve what it claims.
Austin writes:
BW film can easily handle 10 stops, with
very little effort.
It can _just barely_ handle ten stops, from zero to maximum
density. Since
some margin is necessary in order to hold detail, ten stops is potentially
difficult to achieve. Fortunately, it's not generally
Tells moi that
any claims of some
absurd numbers like 50-100MP are very much off the wall.
Mac,
True if you are comparing them off the wall ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't resist... Anyway, you need to also match the M pixel
number with a format size, otherwise, there is no comparison. I have 35mm
- Original Message -
From: Stan McQueen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 10:50 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Real-World Scene Brightness Range
Can you give us an example of the type of scene that might have a 10 stop
range of brightness? How do you measure
At 11:04 AM 5/11/2002 -0400, Austin wrote:
In any case, however, real-world scenes aren't likely to ever tax
film over
a ten-stop range.
You say that, but it's just not true.
Can you please show or describe some examples of scenes that might have a
10-stop range of brightness in them and
- Original Message -
From: Preston Earle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 4:18 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 3 year wait
Please help me out. What was the original subject of this post titled 3
year wait?
That's how long it will take before the
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 12:47 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Firewire Card
If Bill gave everyone who bought all the other garbage OS's his company
has sold them previously a free copy of XP (and
Hi Stan,
As I said earlier, in photographing in mountains and deserts,
metering with a 1-degree spotmeter, I don't recall exceeding 6 or 7 stop
ranges.
I don't know what you are metering, and whether you are talking landscape
scenes, or what, but certainly in mountains, where you will get
Denis writes:
To carry disk performance to the max, go with
a striped SCSI array of 15000 RPM drives!
Very expensive, though. Also, one thing tends to lead to another: If you
use 15000 RPM drives, you soon have to start worrying about keeping the
whole machine from melting down in its own
On Saturday, May 11, 2002 8:39 AM, Rob Op's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Photoshop
200M scan file size.
I now have a P3 800 / 780M ram + scratch disk.
That should be OK, if you have allocated enough RAM for PS. Try 75%.
This is using sometimes 3G PShop memory
The History (undo) list eats a
If you can afford and configure 10 GB of RAM, so much the better
I know of no PC motherboard that will support that much RAM even if one
could aford to buy it. What motherboards do you refer to in suggesting more
than 2-3GB of physical RAM?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To carry disk performance to the max, go with
a striped SCSI array of 15000 RPM drives!
Very expensive, though. Also, one thing tends to lead to another: If you
use 15000 RPM drives, you soon have to start worrying about keeping the
whole machine from melting down in its own heat.
I'm
Trying to figure out whether any
increased performance would be worth the loss of data if one
of the drives goes. On my current system I use the second
disk for daily incremental back-ups (without full mirroring)
which would be useless with the level 0 RAID. How, also,
does RAID interact with
Laurie writes:
I know of no PC motherboard that will support
that much RAM even if one could aford to buy it.
That's why I said if you can afford AND CONFIGURE.
My own motherboard is limited to 1.5 GB (and that's what I installed).
Windows XP Home Edition is limited to 2 GB (a
On Saturday, May 11, 2002 7:07 PM, John Matturri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and 2 80MB 7200 drives
RAID-0 (which is supported on the motherboard
Just a comment: With the popular on-board HPT RAID-chipsets, Seagate
Baracuda IV drives in RAID-0 will result in *lousy* throughput, 1/2 -
1/4 the
Actually, Anthony, a disk array is external to the system and has
cooling
designed for the hotter drives
Actually, it does not have to be external to the system, although many -
especially SCSI RAID arrays - are. My motherboard has an EIDE RAID array
that is an integral part of the
I'm getting a system with 1.5 GB of RAM and 2 80MB 7200
drives (CPU: Athlon 1800+). Aside from possible
video-editing, would there be a reason to set the drives up
as RAID-0 (which is supported on the motherboard I'm using
so doesn't add to the cost).
If I am not mistaken, I believe that the
My current system is an Athlon 1.4GHz with 1 80GB single drive and 2
40's in RAID0. The motherboard is an Iwill KK266-R and I won't get
another. I hope your mobo doesn't use the Megaraid controller, because
it has been a source of problems for me. My belief now is that, if I
really need RAID, I
I am running three IDE drives striped using Windows 2000 striping and I get
close to triple transfer speed.
If you want to read drive reviews look at these two sites:
http://www.storagereview.com
http://www.tomshardware.com
The perfromance bargain right now seems to be the Western Digital
I have an i1 from GretagMacbeth for today. I am trying to calibrate my
Epson 1200 but have some questions. I would appreciate if somebody
could give me some input. So here is my question.
First I have to print a test target. I then scan this target in. With
these measurements a new printer
--- Robert Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Idealy, I could disable a
profile for printing the test target. Is this possible? If so how?
Is it 'same as source' that won't do any additional conversion? I
believe it is but I am not sure. I always used a standard profile form
my epson1200 and have
With Polaroid still in a state of flux anyone know if Insight is still
under development and if so, when the next update is likely to be
released. Personally I'm interested in the 6x18 single pass scanning
facility for the SS120.
Trevor S
Hi John,
Provided you don't start using your hard drives after running out of
RAM I don't think it is worth the extra effort and expense of installing
scsi RAID systems. I have a lowly Athlon 1Ghz and two 20GB 7200 rpm hard
drives with 896mb of RAM. Opening a 60mb file takes 5 seconds.
Date sent: Sat, 11 May 2002 11:14:05 -0400
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[filmscanners] RE: Film Recorders (3 year wait)
Tells moi that
any
Many critical photogs don't think that 35mm is suitable period
for over 11x14. I tend to agree.
In general, I agree too, but I do print 13x19 BWs somewhat frequently from
my 35mm negatives with really no difficulty...but I shoot with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) when I shoot 35mm, and those are
[This is a bit off-topic / harddisk-technical]
I wrote:
[...] HPT RAID-chipsets [+] Seagate Baracuda IV [...] *lousy*
throughput
On Saturday, May 11, 2002 10:02 PM, Austin Franklin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have this system, have you corresponded with HPT or the
manufacturer about this
Alas Arthur, the quotes in your post are attributed to me; but they are not
my words. Since I did not write them although I did raise some questions
concerning the question of 4K RES used to define film recorder resolutions
as referring to LPI and not ppi which would mean that the resolution in
I am running three IDE drives striped using Windows 2000 striping and I get
close to triple transfer speed.
I am unfamiliar with Win 2000; but with Windows XP, the striping is done in
the motherboard BIOS if the RAID is built into the mother board. I am not
sure but I would think that external
50 matches
Mail list logo
