ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Minolta vs Nikon MF Question



I too am used to older Nikon scanners and combining
multiple scans at different exposures. I have been
using the Minolta for about a month, and have not as
yet found an image which is beyond the usable dynamic
range of the scanner in a single scan. My images are
mostly Velvia, Astia and Pan-F so should be a decent
test, but no Kodachrome (which is known to cause
problems on just about all scanners).

---  <Toliwel@aol.com> wrote: > I'm about to buy a new
MF scanner.  The choices are
> the Minolta Multi Pro and
> the Nikon 8000.  I have been using an LS 2000 and
> like several features that
> the Minolta doesn't have, but have always had
> trouble combating a blue cast
> that is hard to impossible to compensate for. I
> believe this is due to the
> LED light source.  Vuescan does a fairly good job
> correcting this, even with
> my old Kodachromes, but is more difficult to use
> than NS2.5.  Kodachromes are
> very dense and require a lot of work to correct.
> What I really like about
> the Nikon is the analog gain control, which enables
> me to capture almost
> invisable detail in dark areas and extreme
> highlights in separate scans when
> necessary, and then blend them in PS.  I'm not sure
> I could live without this
> feature, though I realize it really is a workaround
> for the LS 2000's limited
> dynamic range.
>
> My questions for those that have used these scanners
> are:
>
> 1.  Does the Nikon 8000 still have the blue cast of
> the 2000 or have they
> licked this problem? How do old Kodachromes work
> out?
>
> 2.  Without the analog gain control on the Minolta,
> I can't fiddle with the
> exposure. With it's greater dynamic range, do users
> find that they can
> extract all the useable shadow detail, and not blow
> out any highlight detail
> in a single scan with a transparency?
>
> Any advise would be most welcome.
>
> Tom Wells
> toliwel@aol.com
> towells@aol.com
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk,
> with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe' in the 
title or body




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.