Digital BW, The Print

Simon, respectfully: *over sharpening* - as one usually do with Epson flatbeds - is not "bringing the detail which is there"... this is simply "making up pixels". I totally agree with Julian on his last statement adding "for 35mm film" on the end.

Regards,
Loris.

---- Orijinal Mesaj #1 ----
Kimden: julianthomas@...
Kime: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Bilgi: 
Konu: Re: [Digital BW] RE: Is this noise or what (was: Epson3200 - Test results)
Tarih: 3/17/2003 7:14:09 PM
exactly my point! I'd be interested in how you can say that 'the detail is
there' if the scan appears very soft. I can give the appearance of
sharpness - as i do - by USM tricks - but the details (I'm thinking here of
thin branches, trees etc - the usual difficult suspects) are missing. When
people say the 1680/3200 are sharp, what they are really saying is 'sharp
enough for them' - but as to some form of 'absolute' sharpness (I feel
Austin about to dive in;-0 ) they are very second rate IMO compared to film
scanners.

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Lamb" <simon@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] RE: Is this noise or what? (was: Epson3200 - Test
results)


> Julian
>
> I must be losing the thread here.  What Polaroid and Minolta are you
> comparing scans with?  If the Multi Pro and SS120 then you cannot compare
> flatbed to dedicated film scanner.  My 3200 scans appear very soft but
look
> great after sharpening in PS, and all the detail is there.
>
> Simon



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]