RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Were you using a point source enlarger for B&W? If so, you might have been getting a Collier effect . I believe the Nikon scanners that use LEDs may
Messages
Browse messages
Page 2125 of 2186 · 109257 messages matched
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... Really? Absolutely? I thought silver particles made for a higher density than dye clouds. I don t know about ideal conditions, but from my experience in
Re: [Digital BW] selenium
2001-09-26 by ternahan
Just click on an image for technical details...The animals are on Seagull Oriental warm tone(the slowest paper ever made), the baby is on Luminos Pearl. The
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... okay, you forced me to get nit-picky and state why you didn t answer the question. He stated a case if you have a film with a DR which is small enough
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... Mike, Honestly, I m on the edge. I feel a little more info and I ll get this securely, a little more confusion and I ll loose it completely. Would you run
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Johnny Deadman
... not true, Austin -- John Brownlow http://www.pinkheadedbug.com
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... That isn t true, Todd just mentioned a case of thinking that a 14bit scanner did this when in fact it doesn t but he would like it too (I assume). I think
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... okay, you re alot further off than I thought you were. You need to read more carefully or something. I was talking about expanding the entire range the
RE: [Digital BW] Re: Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... For raw data, yes...but of what use, I still don t know. ... Yes it does. That s like saying two apples are a different two than two oranges! ... But a
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Sure I did. I gave an explanation for an answer. I ve tried the yes/no answers with you two, and you always come back and ask why , so I guess I can t
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... This is getting futile. Yes you COULD do this, but for most everyone it is entirely useless. No one but you seems to have any desire to want to do it.
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... It has a higher density range than B&W negatives.
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Yes there is, it s an operation, and you re asking the scanner to decide what valid image data is. That s non-optimal. ... WRONG. How do you know that
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... yes, what was Austin talking about, color neg has a higher density range than what? Todd, did you get what I was saying about 10 vs 14 bit in the other
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... Ya me too. :-) I thought due to it s low density dye clouds color neg film was of low density range, thus low Dynamic Range, thus an easy scan. Don t tell
Re: [Digital BW] selenium
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... Could you tell us about these? Which ones are the toned ones? maybe a little about what papers were used, etc... thanks, mikeH
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... What does the human eye have to do with it if you are expanding a small tonal region to use a larger gamut that the human eye CAN see? -mh
[Digital BW] Re: Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... yes, I too have no experience with Minolta scanners and am saying nothing good or bad about them in this thread. -mikeH
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... except you didn t answer is question, hehe The answer is no.
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... There is nothing not optimal about it, it doesn t hurt the data in any way. ... YOUR histograms start out compressed (with a raw scan) Im not talking about
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... All that you and I can see. ... I suggest you do some research on the capabilities of the human eye...
RE: [Digital BW] Re: Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Well, I don t know about all that...but some of their technical statements were not really accurate, their example of 14 bits vs 16 bits wasn t using real
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... Are you saying that todays scanners capture all the tones in any given negative or chrome, as long as their density is not out of the scanners range?
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Color negative film has a higher dynamic range, and therefore will occupy a wider range of values...you get more tones, but it s not from intermediate
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... You are right, but only if the data is low bit justified.
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... WHY spread it out? Why have the scanner do something you may not want it to do, or do it not optimally? For 8 bit data, this is done...but you have to
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... Isn t that the case if you have a film with a DR which is small enough that it can be captured by a 10-bit scanner, but you scan it with a 14-bit scanner?
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... A 14bit scanner captures (maps you could say) to a larger piece of the 16bit histogram than the 10bit. But at the same time it captures more dense negs. So
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Unless you re scanning for another species, they are completely useless, and you will never see them in a final image that contains all the range of tones
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... Come again please? I don t get this. They should look the same BECAUSE the 14 bit scanner is capable of capturing more dense negs? Todd
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... I would go crazy with the tones! i would love them and feed them and keep them forever and ever!
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... This isn t an issue for me, but it has to do with the original question. Which is why, if you are scanning something with a range of 3.7 on a scanner only
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... I know I for one await *your* answer (Austin) with baited breath. If you can explain this clearly, and why the difference yields differing spans, we will
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... I know, I m dying. If this goes on much longer my business, health, and sex life will suffer --more! ;-) I just hate that I haven t gotten to the Ah-ha!
Re: [Digital BW] Re: Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Peter
Wow, there is a whole lot of techno babble laced, pompous opinions about a device that apparently no one has used! To read the opinions that are expressed in
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... That is correct. There are two possible places of bunching . One, in the actual span of the data in the actual scanner dynamic range (bit depth), and
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... What Todd should have said is in linear fashion, not GAMMA (that threw Austin for a loop) What Austin should have said at the end there is; data is bunched
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... It matters in how much space the values will occupy in the 16 bit space when you get them from the scanner. If the values are low bit justified, they will
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Any time the data is manipulated it is NOT raw, plain and simple. Spreading it out makes it NOT raw data. That was the only point. I don t understand
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... I don t disagree, but if the scanner is ONLY capable of capturing that range and nothing outside of it, it seems to me that it should, maybe even as a
[Digital BW] Re: Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... They could probably be found on the internet somewhere. I m sure they are pretty bad. I don t think they rated dynamic range for them back then. ... I ask
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... I agree ;-)
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
... I believe some scanners can do this, like the Imacon for one, but I don t consider that a raw scan anymore. That s a manipulated scan. Todd
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Todd Flashner
Austin, In another post I accused you of contradicting yourself. I should give you the opportunity to defend yourself. I think you do understand this stuff, so
Re: [Digital BW] selenium
2001-09-26 by ternahan
here you go... t ternahan@gentlelens.net You are invited to visit: http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=150137
Re: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by mh@toomanyartists.com
... What difference does it make? I was answering his question of why the raw scan doesn t fill the whole 16bit space. Luckily, we don t have to worry about
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... Do you believe it is high bit justified, or just left low bit justified? In other words, does the scanner A/D give you a 12 bit value of 0101 1010 1010.
RE: [Digital BW] Re: Bit depth, was Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... OK. ... Got the specs for them? ... Because that s what ratio values typically are. Ratios are relative to 1. You set 1 to some density value, and when
RE: [Digital BW] Re: Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
I don t doubt that. It could be better CCD, better analog front end, better A/D...basically, better linearity, better noise, better optics...better transport.
RE: [Digital BW] Bit depth
2001-09-26 by Austin Franklin
... What theoretical arguments ? I m talking reality. ... It doesn t, but it s designed TO be that way. It is easier TO design it to be this way. What