Seems pretty slight to me - but I've already surmised that I am not in the
same league of perfectionism as everyone else round here (hey, I own an
LS40 - and my most expensive camera component ever (SLR body, lens, flash,
etc) is my Canon P&S).
What magnification are we looking at in the zoom? Somebody was talking
about making the 8000 slow down to use only one row of CCD sensors at a
time, instead of three (have I got the right scanner?) so it would seem that
if you could turn on that option, you might get a preferable result. The
banding you're getting looks, to me, just like the effect I get out of my
band-finding technique, described below, except on a much much much smaller
scale.
I guess I shouldn't suggest you turn on GEM! Though I suspect it will hide
the banding. (I really like GEM.)
I have found a good technique for banding discovery (well I think it is
cool, but it doesn't apply to this scenario). If you scan an image twice
and then subtract one from the other and then compress the white point down
to about 8-20-ish, you should see banding (well I do with the LS40). On a
fairly large scale! I think it gives some insight into the banding you are
finding, and if my hunch is correct, making the 8000 scan with only a single
row of CCD sensors will make the problem go away - or at least ameliorate
it.
Jawed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Lawrence Smith
> Sent: 18 July 2001 17:00
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...
>
>
> Here's an example of the banding. It
> is EXACTLY the same as my previous 8000 had done.
>
> Lawrence
>
>
>
>
