Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















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

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

RE: filmscanners: ScanWit Yellow stain



Here are some of the scans I promised.

I made them by attaching the scanner to another current outlet group, but it
did not change things. I also swapped the negative to show you the error IS
in the scanner, not the negative (largest yellow band still appears at the
right side).

Here they are in the http://www.bigfoot.com/~jerfi/testscannerfix/ dirctory:

The film scans were made using Vuescan 7.1.3, the newest version yesterday.
I set:
*        the Vuescan settings to default, 
*       used a scan resolution of 675dpi and resampled the image to a
quarter its size (corresponding to 337 dpi) using Picture Window Pro 3.0.
The crop file was saved from Picture Window Pro as a jpg at 100% quality
The raw scan file was also downsampled using PWP and may as a result have
obtained a color profile (perhaps sRGB, didn't take the time to check that).
My mistake.  However, you will still see the banding if you convert it to a
positive scan. BTW. the raw scan file is still in 16bit mode. 

Now if you compare this to the flatbed scan from the print I received from
the printing service you know that the print shows much more color
information AND has no banding! Unfortunately, they just crop wrong!#$%

Film: Kodak Supra 400, shot at ISO320, me leaning almost over the car with a
wide-angle.
The whole roll was shot at ISO320, but this particular negative seems more
over-exposed.
Except for the yellow bands and strange color I obtained a scan with a very
nice soft! grain pattern.

The crop file:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/joostrom/testscannerfix/ToWebFilmScanquart.jpg 162k

The raw tiff 48bit file:
http://home.wanadoo.nl/joostrom/testscannerfix/scan0002quart.tif 858k!!!

The nice flatbed scan with the wrong crop but NO banding: 
http://home.wanadoo.nl/joostrom/testscannerfix/toWebFlatbedquart.jpg 132k
(also PWP'd and saved at 100% jpg quality)

So is it user error, is it scanner error (bad lamp / bad CCD) or is it me
pushing the envelopes of what a decent scanner can do?


Thank you all for your interest, I've used you comments to make my point at
Acer NL,

Jerry


BTW. All good intentions and manners aside: Mr. Honda Lo has become very
silent for weeks now. The same goes for the dutch contact person, whom I've
mailed several times (always received a return receipt, but unfortunately
that does not prove much). I am getting frustrated enough to write to the
bosses / managers / colleagues of this dutch contact person (whose email
addresses I got from Mr. honda Lo), just not there yet and still hoping for
some help from Acer NL. Are they just waiting for my 90 days warranty over
the previous repair to pass?
This mail is Bcc'd again to both Honda Lo and the dutch contact person.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oostrom, Jerry [SMTP:Jerry.Oostrom@Alcatel.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:52 PM
> To:   'filmscanners@halftone.co.uk'
> Subject:      RE: filmscanners: ScanWit Yellow stain
> 
> The scan that I made is indeed OFF the planet, even on my screen, but it
> has
> been done with the regular settings in which I scan normally exposed
> negatives (gamma 2.22). I overexposed the whole roll from ISO 400 to ISO
> 320, should not be too much I think, but this frame came out more
> overexposed than others. The print from the printing service is OK though,
> I
> could send a flatbed scan of it (the only problem is their cropping, they
> took off parts of the left door!@#$%). 
> 
> Anyway, before you all start thinking I am in error here, I think I'll
> send
> a raw scan downsampled to the list (I'll send only the link) so you can
> see
> for yourself if it's me or the Scanwit.
> 
> The scanner does not work OK on normally-exposed materials in the sense
> that
> even though the errors are much less visible, they are still there, most
> noticeably on even coloured or light colored parts of a scan from negative
> and on dark colored parts of a positive. Its ruining the wedding shots we
> have taken from our family.
> 
> Thank you for your interest,
> 
> Jerry
> 
> > info & comparisons




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.