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: Minolta 5400 scan Elite Tests



> - Image quality - sharpness: The Canon was definitely sharper and more
> snappy on the same image. This could be (and I suspect it is) the
> effect of
> Digital Ice vs Canon Fare. I intend to do another test with Ice off
> (unfortunately I scanned all my Canon samples with Fare on) The
> difference
> was very obvious and before sharpening, the Minolta scans looked
> pretty bad
> compared to the Canon's.

Is this the experience of other people too?

i am planning to buy this scanner. but sharpness is crucial.

At 5400 dpi you have too make pretty sharp pictures and for that you need
high grade camera lenses. Also a difference may be the use of diffuse or
colimated lightsources in the scanners. Colimated lightsources will give
apparently a higher sharpness, it enhances grain perception. Also, seeing
more apparent grain is not an indication of more resolution.  Furthermore,
ice and fare both reduce sharpness, this is inherent  to the process, and
some of this software does better than others.
What i like to know, is how well it does on a raw scan, without any
postprocessing except for filmprofiling and global tonal range adjustments.
No sharpening, ice, gem, fare, whatever. Does it fine with darker slides or
dense negatives? How much noise does it generate actually? And at what
temperature was this measured? (chips tend to make more noise when they get
warmer)
I prefer to keep scans as pure as posssible in order to archive my images.
Ice gem etc are postprocessings subject to future improvements. And for
definitive images nothing can compete with skillfull manual  retouching.
Sharpening i do always just before sending the image to the printer, because
it depends on print size and the end state of the image.
According to others the minolta is definitely sharper than the existing 4000
dpi scanners, and has better actual dynamic range.
Is this true for most people?

sirius




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