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: Filmscanners - is this about as good as itgets?


  • To: lexa@www.lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Filmscanners - is this about as good as itgets?
  • From: "Nagaraj, Ramesh" <Ramesh.Nagaraj@ca.com>
  • Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:01:14 -0500
  • Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
  • Thread-index: AcLGL8GMEGC4D9HKQUW7HtvsdSJj+QAYmJKg
  • Thread-topic: [filmscanners] RE: Filmscanners - is this about as good as itgets?
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk



-----Original Message-----
From: Paul D. DeRocco [mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 12:51 PM
To: Nagaraj, Ramesh
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Filmscanners - is this about as good as
itgets?


> From: Nagaraj, Ramesh
>
> One problem with scanner, at-least for me, is I had to do a lot
> of colour correction.
> Since photography is not my profession, I had to read a lot about it.
> Even with all these effort, colour correction takes lot of time
> and I am not satisfied with my SKILL.
> I think something needs to be done to improve this, may be by
> providing film/slide profile for
> each film/slide. Except for this I am very happy with
> Film-Scanner combination and will
> continue for another 2 years.
>
> I have not used any DSLR. Does DSLRs produce accurate colours?

>>With my LS-2000, I've always found that positive scans worked pretty well.
>>Negatives are a different story, though. I've tried both NikonScan and
>>SilverFast, and never been able to get a good handle on color. Fortunately,
>>I've never shot very much negative film. But in theory, it shouldn't be any
>>harder to get good color from scanning negatives, given profiles specific to
>>the film type.

>>But I think that digicams ultimately have an advantage over film, either
>>positive or negative, and that's that they directly convert light into
>>numbers. With film, the image goes through two difficult to control
>>photochemical processes that aren't intrinsically very linear. I find it
>>utterly amazing that it works as well as it does, especially with slides. My
>>digicam experience is limited to 2MP and 5MP cameras, but after over a year
>>I find the color rendition to be much more satisfying than film. The overall
>>white balance may be off in the raw shot, but that's a trivial fix in
>>Photoshop. There is a bit of a learning curve, since digicams do have less
>>exposure latitude, but I find that film scans, even from slides, take more
>>fixing than direct digital photographs.

When using DSLR there is no dependancy on the film profiles, this may help in 
getting good colours. 

Thanks
Ramesh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.