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: Flatbed vs film scanner



Hello Chris,

Wednesday, November 24, 2004, 9:59:43 AM, you wrote:

>> The difference is noticable. The Minolta delivers sharper
>> pictures with more contrast and more details. If you want I
>> can upload a test picture to my homepage to show the difference.

> Yes please.

Sorry for the delay.

All photos were scanned at 2700dpi with the Minolta Elite 5400 and
with 2400dpi with the Canon 5200F, no alteration was done in PS.

First the effects of the different settings:

Minolta - ICE on:
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/M_ICE.jpg
Canon - Sharpen on (dust low):
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/C_Sharp.jpg
Canon - Sharpen off (dust low):
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/C_No_Sharp.jpg

Here a sample of the shadow details:
Minolta - ICE on:
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/M_shadow.jpg
Canon - Sharpen on (dust low):
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/C_shadow.jpg

And finally a scan that shows the capabilities of ICE and FARE:
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/ICE.jpg
FARE on setting low
http://members.blackbox.net/dieter.henkel/Photos/Sharp_on,dust_low.jpg


--
Best regards,
 Dieter


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



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.