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: Re: filmscanners: supra 400



>===== Original Message From Rob Geraghty <harper@wordweb.com> =====
>Tom wrote:
>> Not an answer, but I had exactly the same problem
>> with Supra 400.  Stopped using it even though it
>> is supposed to be 'scanner optimized'.
>>> I have a number of supra 400 images that I will need to get
>>> decent scans of. Using my SS4000 I get terrible grain
>>> aliasing making the quality unacceptable.
>
>Odd.  I thought Tony said the SS4000 aliased less than 2700ppi scanners.
> Can someone explain this to me?  ISTM that people are seeing grain at 
4000ppi
>and calling it aliasing?

I suspect that these "4000dpi" scanners really only have 3200dpi's worth of 
resolution - which is hardly a million miles away from the 2900dpi of 
something like the LS40, say (which aliases quite strongly with Supra 400).  
What did that bumper review of scanners conclude about resolution?

Pity Mike Duncan didn't get an SS4000... teehee.

Actually I suspect that there's a noticeable difference between a "4000dpi" 
scanner whose lens is a little soft versus another whose anti-aliasing filter 
is badly designed (or not there!).  I suspect the Nikon scanners don't have an 
anti-alias filter (and erm, the optics prolly aren't upto it either) - but 
there seems to be very little hard information on these things as far as I can 
tell.

I suspect if you want to use Supra 400 you should be over-exposing somewhat, 
just to keep your shadow detail out of the grain-aliasy bottom.  I don't use 
Supra 400, I only have a friend's odds and sods of Supra 400 that I've scanned 
as reference.

>
>I haven't scanned Supra 400 because I can't buy single rolls, but Fuji 
Superia
>400 scans OK on the LS30.  Yes, it's grainy, but it has helped a lot for
>situations like taking aerial shots from ultralights that vibrate or leave
>the photographer in the breeze!  I want to try Provia 400F to get the same
>sort of speed which hopefully less apparent grain.

Provia 400 (F? are there variants?) scans beautifully - no grain aliasing in 
shadows on the LS40 (my mate Joel's Provia 400 - he is quite fond of my LS40 
for slide scanning - I don't know how he rated it though).  But you do get 
rather less scene dynamic range than with Supra 400, and it seems to me that 
you should treat it as Kodachrome when scanning (both Nikon Scan and Vuescan 
(on Image) produce scans that are too blue - the Kodachrome setting of NS 
seemed to work really well).

Jawed




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.