Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tina, I went through the same exercise just two weeks ago but with Velvia 50 slides. I compared the Nikon CS9000 scanner to the Canon 5D with Nikon 55mm macro and Nikon slide copy attachment. The contrast came out nearly identical in both cases with the scan very slightly sharper. I could only see the detail differences with a full screen view on my 20" Apple monitor. I had to bring up the shadows in both cases to improve (decrease) the apparent contrast. To me your web photos look similar to my experiment. I like the color of the 5D copy but can see a couple areas where the scan has a little more detail. I can't see a significant difference in contrast. I can't explain why your original tiff's are that much different. Len On Nov 10, 2007, at 10:18 PM, Tina Manley wrote: > PESO: > > I've been experimenting with using a Beseler Slide Duplicator and > the Canon 5D instead of a Nikon LS5000 Slide Scanner for both B&W > and Kodachrome slides. I still prefer the scanner for other films > but for grainy, contrasty films that you can't use Digital ICE > with, the slide duplicator seems to do a better job. I know you > can't really tell anything from a web-sized photo (at least I > can't!) but here are the comparisons for one photo: > > Scanner: http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/88718456 > > Duplicator: http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/88746181 > > I can tell a big difference in the full-sized tiffs. They are both > sharper and less contrasty - which is something I haven't been able > to achieve with the scanned slides. > > Can you see any difference at all in the web jpegs? > > Tina > > Tina Manley > ASMP, NPPA, EP, PI > http://www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information