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]

[filmscanners] RE: Colormatching with Canon S820/S900

  • To: lexa@www.lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Colormatching with Canon S820/S900
  • From: "Mark Otway" <mark@otway.com>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:15:22 -0000
  • Importance: Normal
  • In-reply-to: <3C7CC955.80704@shaw.ca>
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

>> I doubt that's a hair on or near the lens.  Although you
>> used a wide angle lens, I'd be very surprised it could focus 
>> that close to the lens or even a filter ring.

I just used a normal lens (the one that came as standard on the Canon).
I don't have any extra lenses yet, although I want to get a telephoto
for wildlife photography at some point. I also don't have any filter
rings (and wouldn't have the faintest idea what filters I should even
consider buying/using!).

I'm fairly certain it was a hair on the lens, as 8 other pictures taken
from the same day have the hair in precisely the same place, and the
same line marks the prints that I got when the negatives were developed,
before I'd even scanned them. It's unlikely to be a hair that got caught
up in the development process, as the only pictures on that film with
the hair in them were those taken on the same day that the picture I
posted was taken.

>> If it isn't a real hair stuck in the slide mount or on the
>> negs (I'm not sure what type of film was used), or it could 
>> have been a hair actually in the camera at or near the film 
>> plane.

The film was just 35mm Fuji film (can't remember which exact type). 


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


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.