While you may very well be right about the only difference being in the
addition of new film emulsion hardeners to prevent scratching, Kodak claims
to have done more than this to the film so as to make it more appropriate
for scanning.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[E
Roman,
I think that what exists is in fact a compromise; and one which will satisfy
neither side of the issue. I do not think that traditional photographers
who optically print negatives or digital photographers who want to scan
their negatives see the compromise as being beautiful or an advanta
>> By using a film that is
>>developed for one usage and optimized to that use for an entirely
different
>>use for which it is not optimized often leads to unintended consequences.
>which we are aware of, and we use work arounds. another possibility is to
>make a scanner as close in spectral pro
I think we are in agreement here despite my use of "more or less" as a
figure of speech. :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roman Kielich®
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 4:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: orange mas
Roman,
I do not see this as an appropriate answer; actually I think it begs the
question, except if one assumes that priority is to be given to the
traditional methods of printing as you seem to want to do. I do not
criticize you for assigning priority as you have (it is legitimate).
However, othe
Yep, and usually on maximum so I get a bit of black border.
alan
>> Or do you always work on the full image area and crop it
>> later? (Arguably this is an easier way to work.)
>> Regards,
>> Alan T
on 16/1/01 11:28 pm, Rob Geraghty at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Forget it unless what you are after is highly visible grain. If you don't
>> want absolutely appalling grain but want the speed, it is better to push
>> Provia F100 to 400 than to work with straight Provia F400.
>
> I wondered abou
Howard wrote:
> Therein lies my problem: how do I turn off color management in the
> Epson driver?
Ian Lyons has an excellent tutorial about using Wiziwyg which inlcudes info
about the settings of the Epson TWAIN interface. I'm sorry, but I don't
have the URL on me. I think it's the digital dar
Got this response from Nikon.
>Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:37:37 -0500
>To: John Woodworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Scanners Super Coolscan 4000 ED (KMM5986C0KM)
>From: Nikon - Digital Imaging <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: Nikon - Digital Imaging <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Mailer: Kana 5.0
>
Frank wrote:
>Forget it unless what you are after is highly visible grain. If you don't
>want absolutely appalling grain but want the speed, it is better to push
>Provia F100 to 400 than to work with straight Provia F400.
I wondered about this, but it seemed silly that a 100ASA film pushed to
400
I wish
I could help you, but I had the same problem trying to use the ColorCal Profiler
RGB software, with the Epson 1640SU scanner. I was equally bufuddled and could
never get a good result. In fact the results were atrocious. I ended up
doing a manual calibration with this Profiler RGB sof
The grain in the two rolls I scanned were horrible. Colors looked okay.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 5
I would really appreciate some help. I am
trying to profile my Epson 2000P printer using Monaco EZcolor 1.6. To do
this I must print a (Monaco-supplied) profiling image on the 2000P, tape a
(Monaco-supplied) target just below the printed image, and scan the whole
business on a flatbed scan
At 10:17 AM 1/17/01 +1100, Julian wrote:
>At 04:42 17/01/01, Rafe wrote:
>>It's not too difficult to make intelligent
>>"composites" from multiple passes of a slide
>>or negative -- provided the scanner and driver
>>have good registration from pass to pass.
>
>Rafe thanks - I do this sort of thin
Tony wrote:
> frame number so clients no longer get 24a mixed up with 18a.
> Regrettably they are fuzzy as hell thanks to low scanning res
> and a load of interpolation. Hopeless for judging image
> sharpness so fairly pointless.
Except as an index print which it sounds like you were talking
abou
Tony wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 22:34:12 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> I think you mean one LS2000 buys 2 Nikon cameras,
>> unless Nikon SLRs just got a lot cheaper than last I checked. ;)
>Are F5's that cheap in USA?!
I don't know - I live in Australia! I was thinking along
John wrote:
> Has anyone seen Provia 400F for sale? It was announced a while
> ago but I haven't seen it.
I have just finished a roll of it, so it's available in Australia.
I haven't processed it yet to find out how it compares with 100F
for scanning purposes.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED
Forget it unless what you are after is highly visible grain. If you don't
want absolutely appalling grain but want the speed, it is better to push
Provia F100 to 400 than to work with straight Provia F400.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> -Orig
on 1/16/01 4:21 PM, PAUL GRAHAM at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Been reading dissection of the new Nikon's 4000/8000 press claims with
> interest... but can I ask about its optics?
> I noticed that its lens is 14 elements in the 8000, which seems an awful lot
> of glass... now maybe this is great a
Yes, Tony, 2 for the price of a well used LS-20.
(Just kidding of course)
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 6:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: What is a photomultip
Been reading dissection of the new Nikon's 4000/8000 press claims with
interest... but can I ask about its optics?
I noticed that its lens is 14 elements in the 8000, which seems an awful lot
of glass... now maybe this is great and wonderful, or maybe this is because
it does every format from APS
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:14:09 + Richard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
It certainly wasn't designed for photography. At least not in the UK between November
and May.
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfo
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 10:28:56 -0800 Shough, Dean ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Some CCDs feature anti-blooming so that this does not happen.
I think all current generation CCD's try to do this, but there's still a point at
which charge leaks between pixels.
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halft
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 22:38:16 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> BTW speaking of supply and demand, I believe some of the latest minilabs
> are actually scanning the film to print it onto photographic paper rather
> than
> using a more traditional optical printing method. That would
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 19:05:40 -0600 Stan Schwartz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Thanks. Polaroid should have put that fact in their docs or readmes.
:-) Docs are always the last thing to get done, and with betas they are either
aspirational (what it will do, hopefully, once out of beta), or re s
Forwarded Message
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Sat, 13 Jan 2001
12:33:51 -
From: "david bauman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 19:59:23 -0600
Subject: posting...
Cheers Tony. I have attempted to post a query to the list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] the
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 08:14:59 -0800 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The scanner might
> respond quite differently from paper emulsions.
CCD's are a lot more linear in their response than photographic emulsions used on
paper. There is a mismatch here: film has a more or less S-shap
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:02:30 +0100 Oostrom, Jerry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Is it correct to state that a color space with accompanying limits
> to its gamut will have only a finite number of colors? Why?
A gamut comprises a subset of colours out of infinite variety. There are colours
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:06:58 -0500 Rick Trelles ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The voltage ratio is already mapped to the DAC imput range (0-2V or
> other) in the 1:1024 innitial example. Just exchange its 10-bit
> 0-1023 DAC with an 8-bit 0-255 one with the same imput range.
> Output data hard
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 21:19:49 +1100 Roman =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kielich=AE?=
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> does anyone know, which feature of Kodak Supra makes it scanner friendly?
The marketing dept's engineering of the box it comes in? Don't forget, this is the
same company who TV-advertises 'film
At 04:42 17/01/01, Rafe wrote:
>It's not too difficult to make intelligent
>"composites" from multiple passes of a slide
>or negative -- provided the scanner and driver
>have good registration from pass to pass.
Rafe thanks - I do this sort of thing regularly (shows I am not good at
taking flat,
Has anyone seen Provia 400F for sale? It was announced a while ago but I
haven't seen it.
John M.
Rob Geraghty wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> >I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
>
> Whether or not that's true, Provia 100F is the best film I've found for
> scanning on my
Richard wrote:
>I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
Whether or not that's true, Provia 100F is the best film I've found for
scanning on my LS30.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
I must apologize and retract my statement. Evidently, I was wrong about
this, Supra is not available in 120 size as Rafe said. I got some
information on Supra which displayed a picture of a 5-pack of the 35mm stuff
which looked like 120 packaging and which I mistook for that. On the basis
of th
Ok, Thanks for the corrective clarification. Given this, I would concur
that my earlier speculation on how it might be possible to cross-process E-6
to obtain a negative without the color mask would not work. There are
obvious differences between E-6 and C-41 processing apart from merely the
rev
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Shough, Dean wrote:
> > more specific method? I have the same problem when trying to extract the
> > most from some high contrast slides, and have not been really happy with
> > some of my multiple exposure scans for this reason.
> > Regards,
> > Julian
It's not too di
Rafe,
I think it is now out in 120 size but not 220. If I am not entirely
incorrect, it may only be obtainable at present from major mail order
distributors like B&H, Calumet, etc. and not from local suppliers - at least
in the small markets.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:14:09 + Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:> > > digital photography is too young for any
real standard, you want a > film> > designed for
scanning?> > I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for
scanning.> Fuji ProviaF was designed to finish off
Kod
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Rob Geraghty wrote:
> "Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > does anyone know, which feature of Kodak Supra makes it scanner friendly?
>
> I just bought 5 rolls and will try it out this week - so I don't know
> the answer to your question for sure yet. I *believe
Roman... Thank you for the to the point reply...It is obvious to me that you
know WTH you are talking about and understand the realities of the real world
photographic industry I agree that modern color films are miracle
products... It seems to me that the best thing that can happen is for the
At 9:44 PM +1100 1/16/01, Roman Kielich® wrote:
>nothing. after FD you have all exposed AgX developed (BW negative),
>if you transfer film to CD (omitting reversal), the remaining silver
>salt has ano ability to be developed (no latent image). so CD leaves
>some fog, nothing else. then all silv
> At 05:28 16/01/01, "Shough, Dean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Some CCDs feature anti-blooming so that this does not happen. Anyone
> know
> >if any of the linear CCDs used in scanners have this? A way around this
> >problem is to throw away any pixels above a certain value PLUS its
> >neigh
on 1/16/01 3:02 AM, Oostrom, Jerry at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> *Is it correct to state that a color space with accompanying limits
> to its gamut will have only a finite number of colors?
Yup.
> Will a smaller gamut color space allow finer granularity to code
> colors in its gamut than w
In a message dated 1/16/2001 7:37:29 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I just bought 5 rolls and will try it out this week - so I don't know
> the answer to your question for sure yet. I *believe* it's a different
> grain structure which produces less aliasing.
Supra appears to use the same
At 09:14 15/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Gee, for someone accusing another of "sounding like a US Lawyer", I
>believe you are the first person I've encountered on the internet who
>feels the need to protect their name with a registered trademark.
>
>Further, since this is a filmscanner group, it
Collin Ong wrote:
> This brought up a thought: If a film were designed for scanning without
> considerations for conventional printing, what characteristics would it
> include?
>
> Could there be a negative film (with its broad exposure latitude), but
> with no orange mask?
>
> What else?
> digital photography is too young for any real standard, you want a film
> designed for scanning?
I've heard Fuji ProviaF was specifically designed for scanning.
--
Regards
Richard
//
| @ @ --->>> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
C _) )
--- '
__ /
"Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One Nikon LS30 buys at least 2 Nikon cameras.
I think you mean one LS2000 buys 2 Nikon cameras,
unless Nikon SLRs just got a lot cheaper than last I checked. ;)
Rob
"Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> does anyone know, which feature of Kodak Supra makes it scanner friendly?
I just bought 5 rolls and will try it out this week - so I don't know
the answer to your question for sure yet. I *believe* it's a different
grain structure which produces less
At 08:14 15/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>What you say is true, however, in terms of digital scanning, what matters
>is not how color photographic paper emulsion responds to the masking, but
>how the masking might alter the translation of the scan with a digital
>scanner using an CCD and software
OK Photo wrote:
>
>> It used to be printed on photographic paper you know, using the same
>> filter pack
>> for an entire roll, or even an entire batch of film!
>
>
> That would be true if the entire roll was shot using the
> same exposure, lighting, etc.
>
> Change your exposure, lighting
"Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> tell you anything? How many people would buy it? How many rolls? how much
> can we (KOdak, Agfa, Fuji) make on it? what is return on investment? Big
> companies answer to shareholders, not to whims of some
photo-digi-fanatics.
BTW speaking of supply a
Roger wrote:
[snip]
> So, unfortunately, you won't have a negative colour image
> after the second (Colour) developer.
Doesn't this stuff relate to cross-processing somehow? Or is it only
possible to cross process from a neg film to E6 not the other way around?
Rob
Laurie,
E6 goes like that -
first developer -> BW negative (silver based)
stop/reversal -> stops the first developer and makes the remaining
unexposed silver salts "eligible" for color dev
color dev -> reduces the remaining AgX and forms a positive color image (at
the end of this stage, whole si
>Now, I wonder what would happen
>if you left out the reversal bath and went straight to the Colour
>Developer... I've never bothered to try such a drastic move, but it
>might be interesting.
>
>Regards,
>Roger Smith
nothing. after FD you have all exposed AgX developed (BW negative), if you
tr
At 21:48 15/01/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>I'm actually a bit puzzled, myself, as to why
>drum scanners are (were?) so damned expensive.
>
>Aside from the rotating drum, the mechanical
>considerations aren't that tough, it seems to
>me. Nothing a decent South Bend lathe can't
>handle. I think it's
At 16:09 15/01/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>What you say is more or less the case. I do not think it is possible to
>OPTIMIZE any given film emulsion so as to meet the necessary criteria and
>needs of both digital and traditional. What is being done now is an attempt
>to reach a compromise in the are
At 12:10 15/01/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>I am not a U.S. lawyer; I am a professional commercial photographer by
>occupation.
>
>I am neither new to the principles modern color photography nor ignorant of
>the history and purposes of the orange mask. I was merely trying to point
>out in as inoffensi
At 15:07 15/01/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Perhaps a silly question, but then again, the only silly or stupid
>question is the
>one you don't ask This group seems to be fairly proficient in the
>technical
>sides of both film scanning and film processing... The question.. would it
>not be
>possi
Roman Kielich® wrote:
> At 07:37 13/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>
> the color of the mask depends on used components, which vary from
> manufacturer to manufacturer and/or film. it is however possible to have
> films with identical mask, even from different manufacturers. it
> depends, what
At 14:09 15/01/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>Along these same lines, would it be possible to produce a positive film
>that has characteristics better suited to scanning, e.g., lower contrast
>and maybe less density in the shadows?
the whole beauty of scanning standard films is ability to have advant
Laurie Solomon wrote:
>> Bear in mind that it is not important, how does the mask look to your eye,
>> but how the paper emulsion sees it. and for the paper the differences may
>> be negligible.
>
>
> So would one be wrong to interpret what you are saying here in a fashion as
> to infer that
Roman Kielich® wrote:
> you sound like a first class US lawyer. Indeed, the negative films were,
> are and will be designed primarily to be copied onto a positive medium,
> to wit a photographic paper.
> The reason for the orange mask is an unwanted absorption of a cyan and a
> magenta dye i
There is a direct relationship between the color mask characteristics
and processing. The dye masks are directly related to how the color
development of the film occurs, since both the actual color negative
image and the visible dye layers are related inversely. Indeed, errors
in processing
At 14:17 15/01/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>If I am not mistaken, there seems to be a drift on the part of
>manufacturers to
>provide film stock that will be usable for both digital and paper processing.
>Kodak Supra has been portrayed as such a film.
does anyone know, which feature of Kodak Supra m
Anyone care to answer my previous questions?
Perhaps the questions can be translated as:
* Is it correct to state that a color space with accompanying limits
to its gamut will have only a finite number of colors? Why? Or is this
finiteness applicable for the number of colors that the curren
At 09:10 15/01/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>This brought up a thought: If a film were designed for scanning without
>considerations for conventional printing, what characteristics would it
>include?
>
>Could there be a negative film (with its broad exposure latitude), but
>with no orange mask?
>
>Wha
At 17:59 15/01/2001 +, you wrote:
>Im always interested in other users views on materials and equipment
>which I use.
>Im surprised to see Roman Kielich®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] say that XP1
>Dev was not compatible with C41 film because as I stated earlier I used
>it for ALL my C41 work with a con
This message will also go out in plain
text in case HTML and attachments are rejected.Per Scanning - The
Professional Way, by Sybil Ihric & Emil Ihric (1995 so it's
dated):
"Charge_Coupled Devices (CCDs)
Flatbed, sheet_fed, and hand_held scanners, dedicated film and slide
scanners, and s
Hi all
I am new in this newsgroup. I read the newspaper today, and Nikon has new film scanner
Coolscan IV ED. Does anyone know about it?
Simon
70 matches
Mail list logo
