Thanks guys - I knew this!
Actually I think I did - even had the terms right - but from memory
couldn't get it to work as I expected (I am talking maybe 6 months ago) so
decided I just didn't understand it at all. Maybe it is the problem you
(Rob) mention here, or maybe my finger trouble.
I do try with Vuescan every now and again, and it does (as I said) give me
some good results - sometimes.
I tried it with colour restoration the other day and it wasn't half bad
considering it doesn't work at a film level as I read ROC does. I was
quite impressed and even though it required a bit of PS work after, it was
much better than my skills could have managed with PS alone. I might post
this example on my website because the slide was quite badly faded and
purple (Agfa 40 years old) but came up at least with reasonable colour,
even if grainy.
Julian
At 15:20 26/09/01, you wrote:
>Julian wrote:
> > I think Ed would make it much more user friendly if the
> > exposure algorithm automatically applied a buffer which
> > blanks out the outer 10% of the image from exposure
> > calculations.
>
>That's what the border and buffer settings are for. But as mentioned recently
>there are some cases where excluding the neg mask may result in awful
>exposures
>where the mask has not been removed correctly.
>
>Rob
>
>
>Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
>
