RE: [Leica] Digital Truly upon us?

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Well you certainly have more experience scanning color than I do, Rob, but I
find the logic - that increasing scan res won't improve output - somewhat
counter intuitive. Certainly digital capture is different from scanning, but
if you scan at a higher resolution you aren't so much magnifying what's on
the film as you are converting the information into more pixels, giving you
higher "resolution," no?

I think the bottom line on this is that if there were no improvement gained
by scanning images at higher res, by now everyone would have figured that
out and we'd all be scanning on lower-res scanners...

Right, Austin, or have I gone off the deep end here? ;-)

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Rob Appleby
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 3:53 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital Truly upon us?


Is it so evident that resolution really affects the _structure_ of scans? I
think what reddawn was saying was not that 2900=4000 in terms of res, but
that he imagines that the problems he experiences are unlikely to go away by
just increasing the scan res. For instance, the problem of grain breaking up
the colour structure of film. Supermagnify a colour neg of the sky and you
get lots of little dots of various colours; supermagnify a digital camera
image and, it seems to me, you get a load of pixels, all of the same colour.
So digital capture is bound to be structurally very different from scanning
in this sense at least.

- -- Rob

http://www.robertappleby.com
Mobile: (+39) 348 336 7990
Home: (+39) 059 303436

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital Truly upon us?


> While I find myself nodding and mumbling 'so what else is new' to much of
> what you say about digital v. film, I also find myself spitting coffee all
> over my keyboard as I scream TROLL!!!! when you write that you don't think
> you're going to see any difference between film scans made with a 2900 dpi
> scanner and a 4000 dpi scanner.
>
> ROFLO and cleaning up the coffee...
>
> B. D.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Doug Herr
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:38 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital Truly upon us?
>
>
> >
> > what am i doing wrong? how do you guys eke out that last bit of quality
> > from scanning?
> >
>
> Digital imaging technology obviously has come a long way in only a few
years
> but you must consider the post-capture processing involoved.  A high-end
> digital camera has embeded in its chips the total experience of digital
> processing experts, while with photoshop I often feel like I'm just a fool
> with a tool.  You're comparing your experience with Photoshop vs. the
> expertise embedded in the D30's post-capture processing algorithms.
>
> >
> > I don't think this has anything to do with using a 2900 dpi
> > scanner - i believe even with a 4000 dpi scanner i'm going to be seeing
> > the same results.
> >
>
> I see a HUGE difference between my 2400 dpi scans and a 5000 dpi drum
scan.
>
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html