Anthony wrote:
>Rob writes:
>> I tried printing it, but the print looks like
>> the screen - not like the slide.
> That's how it is supposed to look. When you get the screen
> to look like the slide, the print will come out looking like
> the slide as well.
The reason I made the statement above was that others suggested that the
monitor wasn't displaying the scan correctly and that the colour may actually
be in the data but not visible on the screen. If that *is* the case, the
printer driver is also failing to show the correct colour.
>> Having said that, what you say about RGB and
>> turquoise would presumably apply to the scanner
>> itself.
> The scanner could have gamut limitations. Still, I don't see
> why turquoise would be particularly hard to pick up, especially
> when scanners usually do well with much more complex colors,
> such as skin tones. I don't think I saw the start of this
> thread: What type of film is this, and which scanner?
The film is Provia 100F and the scanner is a Nikon LS30. I fully expect
the dark rocks in the same slide to be a challenge to the scanner due to
density (and they are) but not the blues of the ocean. The skin-tones of
the model in the photo are fine. I'll have to find the time to use the
Polaroid SS4000 at work and compare the results. The Polaroid scanner is
in a completely different office and building, so it's not something I have
easy access to, and would have to use after-hours.
Unless I can successfully scan the slide with some other scanner, I can't
show you the colours for a comparison between what the slide actually looks
like and what the LS30 produces.
Rob
Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
