On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 09:38:46AM -0400, darkroom@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> No Bruce, I did NOT assume EVERYONE with a Nikon scanner has a depth of focus
>issue...I'd say you did the assuming here. What I know is it IS an issue with
>that scanner, apparently more so than with any other scanner.
>
> Austin
>
I suspect the problem is there for every LS4000 scanner but people either
have flat enough film or are as not as critical as others.
An easy test is to manually focus on a specific part of the film and scan.
That will give you an image critically focused on that point. Then in
NikonScan manually adjust the "Manual Focus Adjustment" number setting in
increments of +/- 5 then rescan. At a deviation of about 10 from critical
focus you should have noticeable softening of the image. Your own comfort
levels will vary but you can, by using multiple point focus sampling,
determine whether the film is flat enough for a sharp scan across the
entire image.
Tony
> -------------------------------------
>
> Austin,
> You assume that everyone with a Nikon scanner has depth of focus issues.
> But not me nor the three others that I personally know who use them. No
> depth of focus problems. I am not saying that there isn't an issue with
> depth of focus, but that some units(or maybe we just have flat film)do
> not exhibit the problem.
> Bruce Burnett
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Austin Franklin
> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 8:51 PM
> To: buddybru@msn.com
> Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Black and white scans
> onLS4000EDandotherissues
>
> Hi Todd,
>
> > Most of the sources I've seen discuss the Callier effect show the same
> neg
> > printed through the two light sources. Unfortunately, what they've
> done is
> > taken a neg that was tailored to print well on a coldlight and printed
> it
> > with a condenser, then claim the highlights burn out...DUH.
> > Likewise if they
> > print a neg that was tailored to a condenser and print it with a
> coldlight
> > it will look flat.
>
> Well, it has been well proven that you can get the same density range
> from
> the same negative with a cold light or a point light source, using
> appropriate exposure time, aperture and grade of paper (or filter), so
> that
> is a non-issue. The other issues are the "Callier effect", sharpness,
> dust,
> scratches and tonality (dynamic range).
>
> > the
> > Callier effect is predicable, and in some cases useful, and can be
> > compensated for as needed.
>
> What about the limited depth of focus, as well as scratches and dust?
> How
> do you compensate for that?
>
> > Not sure if depth of focus is of any real relevance.
>
> Snark, snark...ask people who own Nikon scanners if depth of focus is an
> issue or not ;-)
>
> > Anyway, just my experience, not out to tell anyone theirs is wrong.
>
> Understood. Me too.
>
> Austin
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners'
> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message
> title or body
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> .
>
--
Tony Terlecki
ajt@mrps.demon.co.uk
Running Debian/GNU 2.2 Linux
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
