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: Vuescan gripes

Actually this is what I experienced: B&W film (TMax 100 or 400, don't
remember), auto-exposure, defaults settings: the histogram of the raw file
had almost nothing in the lower half. I rescanned with manual exposure and
got it right, after a couple of trials... I don't remember the exact version
of Vuescan I'm using (I'm in the office, now), but I downloaded it less than
a month ago.

Thanks, Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: EdHamrick@aol.com [mailto:EdHamrick@aol.com]
Sent: venerd 20 luglio 2001 17.42
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan gripes

In a message dated 7/20/2001 9:50:04 AM EST, alessandro.pardi@inferentia.it 

> Me too. Having a LS-30 I badly need Vuescan as it's the only way to
>  10 bits rather than 8, and it's really a waste of time having to make a 
>  scan to check if the exposure is correct (no clipping at the high and low
>  ends), rather than simply looking at the histogram after the preview. Or
>  I missing something?

Why would you need to check to see if the auto exposure is correct?
Has anyone ever seen a case where the "Device|Auto exposure"
option doesn't work optimally?

It's fairly conservative, and there shouldn't be many pixels in the
raw scan file that are above 95% of white.

The clipping of the cropped file is controlled by the
"Color|White point (%)" and "Color|Black point (%)"
options.  Is there a problem with one of these options?

Ed Hamrick


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.