Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Martin Howard wrote: >Could you stick the two scans on a webpage and let us have the URL? It'd be >really interesting to take a look and see what the differences are and how >significant they are. Martin, Here you go, I've just posted the four scans taken from the same Kodachrome 200 slide:- http://beta.content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=get_album&ID_ Community=Leicausers&ID_Topic=82 I don't have a webpage so I used the Leica-users site. For the benefit of those Luggers that didn't read yesterday's note, here's an update: The scanner used was an LS-30 and I used both Nikon Scan and VueScan software as a comparison. The first shot is scanned using Nikon Scan and shows the whole frame. The second shot is a close-up showing detail in the eye. You can clearly see the image of the window reflected in the eye. The detail is good. The third shot is a close-up of the VueScan image. The detail in the eye is clearly lacking. The fourth shot is the full frame scanned using the VueScan software. The photo was shot on Kodachrome 200 using an R7 with 80-200 handheld @ F4. Lighting is via the window at sunset. I've tried to adjust the image gamma on the VueScan software between 1 and 3 but have found that the detail of the window, reflected in the eye, is clearly lacking compared to the Nikon Scan software. Any suggestions how to improve the settings on VueScan? N.B. I have not altered the scanned images in any way and the ICE function on the LS-30 was turned off. The VueScan is a trial version hence the shading. Thanks in advance, Paul.