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: Shadow detail (was: Re: Re:scanner purchase)



I've found the difference to be the biggest with traditional b & w negs--they 
can in fact
hold dense detail (although, as a neg, it's really highlight detail you're 
dealing with),
and are also seen by some scanners to be denser than they really are due to 
collimated
light sources (the main reason I got a Polaroid 120 instead of the Nikon 8000 
was its
less-collimated light source). Also, the closer you are to the scanner's d-max 
limit, the
more noise you get with your image--you want to be somewhat thinner than d-max 
for cleanest
performance.

This is also, interestingly, software dependent. I have an Ilford Pan F neg 
with an
extremely bright (dense) area with detail. No matter what I do to Polacolor 
Insight, even
the 48-bit raw file is completely blown out in this area. Vuescan, on the other 
hand,
resolves it perfectly. Since Vuescan takes considerably longer to scan this 
neg, and makes
less noise, I've got to assume that it's adjusting for longer exposure.

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