Tony wrote:
>Basically, if a sensible black point doesn't
>allow a decent scan you are stuffed.
There he goes, beating up on us Scanwitters again! ;-)
Unfortunately, Tony's mostly right. But it *is* possible to suck a little
more light out of a Scanwit by covering the calibration slot with neutral
density filter (I've done it, and it gains you about 1/2 a stop), but it
messes up your scanner for regular pics for a little while (until you get it
sighted-in properly again).
I wouldn't do it as a habit, because you're also shortening the life of the
lamp by a logrithmic factor or two. Probably be OK if you're an Able-Bodied
Mechanic with a good supply of Acer lamps, OTOH--just watch out for fires.
;-)
Best regards--LRA
>From: TonySleep@halftone.co.uk (Tony Sleep)
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Shadows and Scanwit 2720s
>Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:35 +0100 (BST)
>
>On Tue, 07 Aug 2001 12:37:58 +0700 GeoffreyJakarta (images@indosat.net.id)
>wrote:
>
> > I'm doing some trani scans which are underexposed [how dare I!] and
> > having a hell
> > of a time digging out the detail in the shadows. This detail is also
> > somewhat brown.
> >
> > I have tried doing multiple passes -8 infact at 2700 dpi.
> > I also have a tramline problem in these deep shadow areas. Are the
> > censors damaged?
>
>No, not damaged. These sorts of horribleness are revealed when you try and
>use a scanner beyond its capabilities. You are exposing behaviour which
>would normally be hidden 'below' the black point, and then amplifying the
>defects by boosting contrast. Basically, if a sensible black point doesn't
>allow a decent scan you are stuffed.
>
>Regards
>
>Tony Sleep
> - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info
>& comparisons
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
