[filmscanners] Re: Density vs Dynamic range

["geoff murray" <geoffmurray@primus.com.au>]

dickbo,
        I've sat back without saying anything watching this crap dribbling
from your mouth for quite some time now , as I am sure a lot of other people
have. I think the best thing you could do is take a course in anger
management, you obviously have problems dealing with people that disagree
with you.

        I have seen people like you on other lists. Belligerent,
ill-mannered and smart-assed. Maybe it was you then too? All that happens is
a lot of people get pissed off with the drivel that emanates from your
mouths and many unsubscribe because this is NOT what we are here for. We are
here to help each other and to learn from each other in a civil and friendly
manner, even when there are disagreements.

        Here in the Antipodes, old chap, you would simply be labelled as a
wanker and told to f*** off out of it. So why don't you?

Geoff

----- Original Message -----
From: "dickbo" <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
To: <geoffmurray@primus.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Density vs Dynamic range


A man of God speaks...and having spoken speaks yet again and no doubt in due
course will perform a miracle which migh, with any luck at all, include
keeping his mouth well and truly shut more often than before....

Now sod off you jerk

----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:16 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Density vs Dynamic range


Yeah, but Dickbo...obviously you don't understand what it means.  It's got
errors in it...but corrected, it's saying exactly what I've been saying.
Like I said, you just don't understand this stuff, and don't want to.

Austin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of dickbo
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:42 PM
> To: darkroom@ix.netcom.com
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Density vs Dynamic range
>
>
> Nice one Cyril
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shough, Dean" <dean.shough@lmco.com>
> To: <dickbo@btopenworld.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 7:11 PM
> Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Density vs Dynamic range
>
>
> ... I'd like to follow this through to a definitive source.
> >
>
> The proposed ISO standard on "Photography - Electronic scanners for
> photographic images - Dynamic range measurements" (WD 21550.3 (42N 4909))
> states that the dynamic range is calculated by:
>
> DR = Dmax - Dmin
> DR = Scanner dynamic range
> Dmax = Density where the signal to noise ratio is 1
> Dmin - Minimum density where the output signal of the luminance OECF
> (opto-electronic conversion function) appears to be unclipped
>
> They go on to define a standard method for defining the signal to noise
> ratio using the concept of incremental gain.  Incremental gain allows the
> signal to noise ratio to be determined independent of gamma.

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



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



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