I agree with Chuck. These are better than normal low cost scans in that
a wide dynamic range is retained. It isn't distributed very well, but at
least it's all there.
I might not go this far with a version for presentation. It's meant to
show how much more tonal range is in the scan than might appear.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Rutherford/Girl3.htm>
That's a great deal of shadow and highlight detail 'recovered'. "I was
lost, but now am found ..."
Moose
Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Actually, I think the scans look pretty good. If you check the histograms
> they've all been done so as to preserve the highlights and only the darker
> shadows are lost if the the dynamic range is too high. ...
>
>
> Brent wrote:
>
>> Got some photos back today from the OM-10, film had been in there a while.
>>
>> ....
>>
>> http://phogra.com/g/v/OM10_OctNov2008/
>>
>> Was very unimpressed with the scanning. None of the places around where I
>> work (central Sydney), seem to do a good job. :(
>>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|