Digital BW, The Print

on 9/6/2002 2:13 PM, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com at
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> Message: 18
> Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 13:00:45 -0700
> From: "Moreno Polloni" <mp@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Shooting digital vs. film
> 
>> It probably is a Nikon, as I believe they are known for revealing grain
> from
>> B&W more so than other scanners, because of the point light sources they
> use
>> (LEDs).
> 
> Hate to blow a hole in your theory, but even though the 8000 uses LED's, the
> light source is diffuse. The grain is comparable to the Polaroid scanner,
> which also has a diffuse light source.
> 
> The Minolta, on the other hand, also has a diffuse light source, but has a
> severe grain problem on neg scans, while slide scans are quite decent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 19
> Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 16:04:25 -0400
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
> Subject: RE: Re: Shooting digital vs. film
> 
> Hi Moreno,
> 
>>> It probably is a Nikon, as I believe they are known for revealing grain
>> from
>>> B&W more so than other scanners, because of the point light sources they
>> use
>>> (LEDs).
>> 
>> Hate to blow
> 
> Ah, blow all you like ;-)
> 
>> ...a hole in your theory, but even though the 8000 uses
>> LED's, the
>> light source is diffuse.
> 
> Well, I'd argue that it's really diffuse...it's still point light...simply
> putting a diffuser over a point light source doesn't make it a diffuse light
> source in the traditional sense, like a cold light...does it?

diffuse is diffuse. That said the size of the light source will make a large
difference.  If you make a very small diffuse source, it will act almost
like a point source or lens focused lamp.
> 
>> The grain is comparable to the Polaroid scanner,
>> which also has a diffuse light source.
>> 
>> The Minolta, on the other hand, also has a diffuse light source, but has a
>> severe grain problem on neg scans, while slide scans are quite decent.

I checked out the minolta scanner at calumet and found the grain in color
negs makes the scanner un-usable.  From my testing and comparison to scans
from my nikon ls2000 of the same image, it seemed that the problem was due
to sharpening in the minolta software that could not be turned off---and to
the gamma curve applied to the scan that added a lot of contrast in the ends
of the curves.  Applying a reverse curve in photoshop helped make the
minolta scans look a lot more like the nikon scans.  The sharpening could
not be removed of course.

My guess is that software writers and engineers wanted to make "high impact"
images from scans so that customers did not complain that scans looked flat,
soft, and needed further adjusting in photoshop. Big mistake.

It's kind of like this with TV's: They are set up with high contrast, high
detailing(sharpening) and VSM (like sharpening, but plays with black levels
as well). With inexpensive tv's, you can't turn this stuff off.  With the
more expensive models, there is usually a way buried in the menu.
> 
> How do you explain that?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin
> 

 
-Bruce

Visit my website at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~smthopr