ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better about Vuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)


  • To: lexa@lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Vuescan vs Insight: what is better about Vuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
  • From: "" <petru.lauric@rcn.com>
  • Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:32:06 -0400
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:23:30 -0700
>From: "Frank Paris" <frankparis@comcast.net>
>Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Vuescan vs Insight: what is
better about Vuescan? (was 24 bit vs more)
>To: petru.lauric@rcn.com

>> Last I checked the
>> slide results were fairly comparable but the negatives were a
>> lot easier to scan with VueScan.
>
>That's interesting. I've always had a lot more problems with
negatives
>than slides with VueScan. I get much more consistent results
with slides
>and have to muck around in PS much less. I wonder what the
differences
>are in our workflow or our scanner model, or both?

I meant to say that Insight and Vuescan results were
comparable when scanning slides and that it was easier to scan
negatives with VueScan than with Insight.

Of course, slides are a lot easier to scan (for me, anyway).
The thing I detest the most when scanning negatives is the
grain aliasing.

Regards,
Petru.

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