ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000



Tony Sleep replied to Mark T.:
> > Eeek.  I thought grain-aliasing and film resolution was covered in
> > either lesson 1 or 2 when you do Filmscanning 101..! :)
> We agreed that the fundamental mechanism was aliasing arising
> from grain pattern interference with the matrix of pixel geometry.
> His investigations resulted in the feature at
> http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Grain.htm which
> remains the most thorough attempt at an explanation  - you
> still won't find it in any text books AFAIK.

I have no doubt that what you say may be true.  However, one thought that
occurred to me when comparing a scanned print with a scanned negative is
that the print has a lower tonal range.  I seem to remember that the print
contains about an order of magnitude less brightness range than a negative
or slide.  Hence, when you scan a print, you will naturally get less tonal
gradation.  I like the reasoning in the second half of the article better.
Dave B.




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.