[filmscanners] RE: Digital ICE

["Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>]

> > Now that is interesting.  I understand the principle, but my
> experience, is
> > that drum scanners actually require more sharpening than high
> end CCDs...at
> > least that's what I've seen in scans I've done on both a Howtek
> 4500 and a
> > Leaf 45.  Though I agree, what you say makes sense theoretically.
>
>
> Austin,
>
> How did you focus the Howtek when the scans were done?

Hi Lawrence,

I was not the operator, so I do not know.

> I have found that
> with mine at least, relying on the autofocus will provide mixed
> results.  I
> generally use the autofocus numbers as a baseline and then fine tune
> manually from there.  Even when the scan looks 'focused' at the auto
> setting, 8 out of 10 times it takes a bit of bracketing to get it
> dialed in.

Excellent input, thanks!

> Using this process I have found that most scans require very little
> sharpening at all.  This is comparing scans I made of the same
> images using
> both my Nikon 8000 and Sprintscan 120.

And as I said, that makes perfect sense to me, since I claim the reason CCDs
need sharpening is because of sensor bleed (crosstalk), and a PMT would not
have that same effect.  I am curious if the apertures exactly match the grid
spacing on a PMT?  If they overlap, that would explain why they aren't
sharp.  If they match, then that would obviously give optimum sharpness...
Do you have any info on that?

BTW, one problem with the N8000 and SS120 is they scan B&W in color,
therefore, they will have the same "issues" as scanning color.  I contend
that the Leafscan, since it scans B&W not in color, gives sharper B&W
scans...  When I get my new lab setup, I plan on running some experiments...

Regards,

Austin

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body