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: Was New Nikon performance, now dust

From: <EdHamrick@aol.com>

> In a message dated 6/10/2001 4:13:40 PM EST,
kingphoto@mindspring.com writes:
> > The T-2500 scan (agfsnipVS) is a bit softer and flatter than the
> >  scan (niksnipVS).  After sharpening and correcting tone on both
> >  I thought the T-2500 scan rendered image detail slightly better
> >  the LS-30 (maybe), but these files not sent as Ed requested only
> >  default result.
> You need to show the .tif files, not the .jpg files.  The .jpg files
> are full of jpeg artifacts.  It's best to put these on a web site
> instead of e-mailing them to this list.
> In spite of this, it appears clear that the T-2500 doesn't focus
> as well as the Nikon scan, and this is most of the reason that
> the dust spots are different.
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick

Ed, as you know by now I've sent you tiffs of slightly larger crops
directly.  The crops have more image detail areas which help me make
comparisons of image detail rendering.  The Agfa is definitely softer,
no argument there, but when I apply unsharp masking to the Agfa scan
on the order of 75%, 0.8 radius, 0 threshold to the Agfa scan, which
is my normal amount to sharpen grain with the T-2500, it is about as
sharp as the unsharpened Nikon scan.  Now the Nikon scan is
interesting in that if I apply the same amount of sharpening it looks
oversharpened to me, with more "chunky" and coarse grain than in the
sharpened Agfa scan.  It appears to me that the LED light source (or
is it the infrared channel, or both?) is at least partially
responsible for the increased "raw" sharpness and grain.  Nikonscan's
ICE has the effect of decreasing sharpness a bit, and Nikonscan's
default sharpening has the effect of bringing sharpness back to
approximately the original level with no ICE, but of course with less
dust etc than either of the "raw" scans.

Anyway, if I tweak and correct both files in PS as well as possible,
each according to individual requirements, the differences between
them are reduced quite a bit, and most telling to me, the corrected
Agfa scan will often exhibit greater image detail, grain sharpness,
and smoothness than the corrected Nikon scan.

I would be happy to post these tiffs to a web site for others to see
and play with, but someone would have to volunteer the space.

Dave King


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.