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]

[filmscanners] Re: Depth of Focus (was Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000)



It does if they are not perfectly flat, which I doubt they ever would be

----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com>
To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 7:06 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Depth of Focus (was Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid
SS4000)


Does this depth of field problem affect mounted 35mm slides, too?

----- Original Message -----
From: "dickbo" <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
To: <anthony@atkielski.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 15:33
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Depth of Focus (was Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid
SS4000)


----- Original Message -----
From: "DaleH" <dhoff@margnat.com>
To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 2:01 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Depth of Focus (was Nikon LS-40 vs Polaroid SS4000)


> Or is it a Depth of Field problem caused by the Film
> carrier's inability to keep film flat?

Difficulty in keeping film flat is not at all an unusual situation and is
most certainly one which can easily be shown as going back way beyond the
time for use of low cost film scanners.

Indeed, in 1953 I was apprenticed as a photographic printer in London and
there never was an ocassion when a professional printer would prefer a
glassless carrier  as a usable tool, although they did exist, were mighty
substantial in size and weight, and only worked some of the time.

If you wish to have a perfectly flat surface then use a glass carrier i.e a
slide mount, it certainly works for me and once you have that one out of the
way you may care to concentrate on the more important issues relating to
image quality, flexability, upgradeability and productive capability.

The problem is depth of field by the way.

Even if any given scanner could offer a suitable dofield the image will by
any definition be distorted.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.