Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/05/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]last time, i tried to open files via lightroom (dng from vuscan); the size of th3 files were too big for LR on xp machine with 4 gig ram. never tried acr, thought it would be the same On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au> wrote: > Since I was wrong and am now a reformed unbeliever, I feel obligated to > provide the information. My email does not accept chocolate attachments. > > As Bob, says, the latest professional version of Vuescan software can save > scans as a .DNG file, which is a Raw file format, just like the files from > an M8. > If your scanner is 16 bit like the top Nikons (and you scan at 4000dpi) > then > you will get a very large .DNG. About a 100MB from a 35mm original, bigger > from medium format, obviously. > Once you have the scan as a DNG, then normal Raw converter progs should > work. This is a big leap compared to doing a conversion (to TIFF or JPG) > within Vuescan itself. In the interests of science I shall make some new > scans and have a play. I'll try with ACR 4.4.1 and LR2 beta. > > Caveats: > Maximum quality defined by the actual dynamic range of the CCD in the > scanner as well as the originally captured dynamic range (film and > exposure > dependant). I suspect that the CCD signal to noise ratio may be a bigger > factor. Your scanners analog/digital converter will determine the quality > of > the 16 bits outputted too. > Those limitations may or may not be significant. Certainly worth some > experimentation. No question but that exposure and white balance > adjustment > in Raw is superior to any saved TIFF or JPG. > ACR has a default setting to ignore DNGs over, (I think) 200MB. > > Other thoughts: If you have a computer with enough grunt to digest > quantities of DNGs of these sizes, then lossless compression in ACR (and I > guess LR) should shrink them down to a mere 50MB or so each from 35mm > scans! > Or buy an M8 and cut out the middle man. > > > Cheers > Geoff > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/e > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/ > > -----Original Message----- > > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon Coolscan 4000 Users.... I need help! > > DNGs are like RAW. Fully able to be manipulated in ACR or Lightroom > without > impacting the original scan. So you can always go back later to the DNG > when > the new HDR/UberDOF/3D/MegawideGamut becomes available. Also, you can play > with the white balance, which is, in my experience, more difficult to do > with a .tif file. ACR lets you do other stuff in RAW that you can't do > elsewhere, but I've never known enough to use it... > > It's definitely not smaller; my tif files are about 100mb smaller than my > dng files (6x6 scanned at 4000dpi). > > Like I said, though, Lightroom seems to freak with 550mb .dng files; > perhaps > Wade can give some insight... > Bob > > Bob Adler > Palo Alto, CA > http://www.raflexions.com > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Monday, May 5, 2008 6:09:18 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon Coolscan 4000 Users.... I need help! > > > Careful Steve. Never come between me and my chocolate! > > :-) > > > > Bob Adler > > http://www.raflexions.com > > > > On May 5, 2008, at 2:42 PM, Bob Adler <rgacpa@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > No Geoff. Here's what you do: > > Go to the Output tab > > Set Output RAW DNG format to on. > > > > The manual is a bit confusing, but if you go look at this it works. > > DNG format > > ACR usable > > > The DNG's are better in some way? Smaller? More compatibility with > Lightroom? > > Mark William Rabiner > markrabiner.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- ------------------------------------- regards, mehrdad