I have to say I find this fascinating.
After the Borg, er, digital capture technology started to make an
impact on the marketplace (~2000 a.d.) I tinkered on the low end but
resisted what was then the high end. My theory was that film, well
scanned, would provide results superior to even the best digicams.
"Wrong, wrong, wrong!" I was told over and over. "Read the reviews
and believe!" Foolishly, I did.
Thus began a long learning curve about color management, file formats,
et. al., that continues to this day. I make the best prints of which
I (and my lab) are capable and still feel like something is lacking.
Yes, I know others here have a different experience and prefer
digital. More power to ya!
Now AG comes along and seems to be telling us that film *can* be
digitized and retain that je ne sais quois! Well, heck fire! I can't
hear enough about that! I own two film scanners (LS2000 and FS4000)
that I've never used, partially out of fear and partially because I
didn't have the necessary hardware horsepower until recently.
Add to that all the recent discussions about the challenges and
discipline required to keep digital files stable and accessible and
I'm really pondering the ease with which negs and slides can be
stored. Yet, in the midst of this, I hear realize that affordable
scanning hardware may disappear from the market along with a lot of
the infrastructure that is dedicated to processing and printing film.
That means that the manufacturers will have little incentive to create
drivers for Windoze 2022 and OS Godzilla which will effectively make
the hardware obsolete and force one to maintain (a) legacy system(s).
And what of file formats? Those are likely to be improve over the
years which could leave current ones unsupported and unopenable by the
next generation. Unlike the box of prints they find in Grandpa's
workroom. ;o)
So continue to preach the gospel of DDC, Brother AG. I'm certainly listening.
Yours for more neo-Luddism,
ScottGee1
On 2/5/07, AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm . . . that newly improved scanner of yours must have been
> > humming over the weekend!
> >
> > Does it have a duty cycle?
>
> If it does, I probably came pretty close to reaching it. I did an
> experiment on one shot where I did a 16X overscan. Yeah, that was
> kinda nuts. Trust me, that wasn't necessary. Fortunately, I did it
> on a tiny cropped section, otherwise my computer would still be
> processing that image. There is a point of diminishing returns after
> two scans. Three or four seem to be the upper limit and even then
> it's only usable if there is detail there. The resolution of the
> lenses and halation seem to top out at about 1/3000 of an inch.
> Overscanning or higher scanner resolution help define where the
> details land, but don't deliver any more detail. I worked up one
> scan on Saturday that was immediately used for display on a
> projection system on Sunday. To say that it was beautiful is an
> understatement.
>
> My weekend wasn't JUST scanning, though. I happened to get out a
> couple of my newly recommissioned DDC cameras and shot them. Ah,
> what a pleasure that was. Yet, when all was said and done I still
> shot about 50 regular DC shots as compared to about a dozen DDC
> shots.
>
> In my testing and calibration this weekend I'm finding that
> DDC-Portra160VC is giving me an effective 8-10MP equivelent. This is
> after grain-reduction (mostly chroma-noise) and resizing to the point
> where there is a maximum amount of detail. Yeah, I know, there are
> regular DC cameras better than this, but still this isn't shabby for
> a 20 year old OM-2S with a $5 roll of film. Oh, this is the OLD
> Portra, not the new stuff. I haven't even shot that yet.
>
> Hmm. Further standardizations of the term:
>
> DDC-[film type]
>
> DDC-Velvia
> DDC-Provia
> DDC-K64
> DDC-Portra160NC
> etc.,
>
>
> AG
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> TV dinner still cooling?
> Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
> http://tv.yahoo.com/
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|