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: Black and white scans onLS4000EDandotherissues


  • To: lexa@www.lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Black and white scans onLS4000EDandotherissues
  • From: "" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
  • Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 09:38:46 -0400
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

No Bruce, I did NOT assume EVERYONE with a Nikon scanner has a depth of focus 
issue...I'd say you did the assuming here.  What I know is it IS an issue with 
that scanner, apparently more so than with any other scanner.

Austin

-------------------------------------

Austin,
You assume that everyone with a Nikon scanner has depth of focus issues.
But not me nor the three others that I personally know who use them.  No
depth of focus problems.  I am not saying that there isn't an issue with
depth of focus, but that some units(or maybe we just have flat film)do
not exhibit the problem.
Bruce Burnett

-----Original Message-----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Austin Franklin
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 8:51 PM
To: buddybru@msn.com
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Black and white scans
onLS4000EDandotherissues

Hi Todd,

> Most of the sources I've seen discuss the Callier effect show the same
neg
> printed through the two light sources. Unfortunately, what they've
done is
> taken a neg that was tailored to print well on a coldlight and printed
it
> with a condenser, then claim the highlights burn out...DUH.
> Likewise if they
> print a neg that was tailored to a condenser and print it with a
coldlight
> it will look flat.

Well, it has been well proven that you can get the same density range
from
the same negative with a cold light or a point light source, using
appropriate exposure time, aperture and grade of paper (or filter), so
that
is a non-issue.  The other issues are the "Callier effect", sharpness,
dust,
scratches and tonality (dynamic range).

> the
> Callier effect is predicable, and in some cases useful, and can be
> compensated for as needed.

What about the limited depth of focus, as well as scratches and dust?
How
do you compensate for that?

> Not sure if depth of focus is of any real relevance.

Snark, snark...ask people who own Nikon scanners if depth of focus is an
issue or not ;-)

> Anyway, just my experience, not out to tell anyone theirs is wrong.

Understood.  Me too.

Austin

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




--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

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