George,
You must have been at Lackland or Brooks. They both have "no windows"
facilities.
I've actually got every thing Nanci Griffith ever put out. Unique voice.
I love it. Yep! We'll put on some Nanci or Robert Earl Keen, teach you
Yankees that Mexican food has *nothing* to do with Taco Bell!
Actually, I'm not the one returning the ES-10. That was another listee.
Other than the crappy software Olympus put out to drive it, I'm very happy
with all of the scans other than the canyon. Perhaps I'm being unrealistic
in my expectations, but I expect to get much closer to the prints (that
have MUCH more detail and less contrast) that I have to date. I'm just
learning the scanning thing, however.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: george [SMTP:geanders@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 1999 7:50 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus ES-10S Scanner
Yeah, that would be fun. Bluebonnets. Song by Nanci Griffith. Nice Texas
folker. Spent one whole year in Texas. Missed the bluebonnets though. Was
inside an Air Force training facility that had *no windows*.
Well, the shots on the site look real good. It'll be very tough to get
shadow detail out of those Velvia trannies, especially on Cibachrome. If
these are the ones that caused you to return your ES-10, I'm not quite
convinced you'll do much better with the Nikon. I hope you do, though, and
know you'll let us know.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Bulger <dbulger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: 'olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, November 18, 1999 3:19 PM
Subject: RE: [OM] Olympus ES-10S Scanner
>George,
>
>Heck, it's just that you and I spent so much time talking about Antelope
>Canyon & reciprocity failure with Velvia last March I wanted to show you
>that your efforts weren't in vain! But the shots on the web site aren't
>even close to what the trannies (and Ilfochromes) hold.
>
>There's a local lab that's doing a lot of digital scanning and doing it
>well. I intend to talk to them re getting me some scans of the 5 or so
>trannies that survived the Great Bulger Culling effort...
>
>If not, well, you'll just have to fly down here in March when the
>bluebonnets hit. Hell, perhaps I'll host a bluebonnet/wildflower weekend
>here -- can you imagine 50 Zuiks crashed out on the floor? Hehe --
>everybody would have to label their lenses prior to coming or I'd end up
>with a few new ones! <g>
>
>Dave
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: George A [SMTP:george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Thursday, November 18, 1999 11:11 AM
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus ES-10S Scanner
>
>Ron & Dave;
>
>I wish I had some help for you, but I'm really just learning about
>producing the best quality scans myself. I do know that shadow detail
>is the biggest problem with scanning, especially for lower 'DMax'
>scanners. 4.0 dmax is the practical best and is what the 5-figure drum
>scanners achieve. My Polaroid is 3.4 or 3.6 depending on whom you
>believe. I haven't really challenged it yet. The ES-10 I've heard is
>3.2 (which is quite good for it's price range), but Olympus would not
>verify any spec for this when I asked them via their tech supp e-mail.
>Don't forget that dmax is logarithmic, so 4.0 is not 'just a bit better'
>than 3.2 but is actually about 7 or 8 times better than 3.2
>
>
>
>George
>
>
>
>
>Dave Bulger wrote:
>>
>> Ron,
>>
>> I'm a new ES-10 owner too. I've got some slides that scan effortlessly
&
>> well, and some that scan poorly. See my web page mentioned in previous
>> posts for excellent examples of this. ::(
>>
>> I'm still at the point of thinking it's my technique rather than the
>> hardware. I've seen numerous references to the fact that the film
>> configuration files shipped with the scanner leave a lot to be desired.
>> There's some guy on the web that works with this scanner a lot and has
>> come up with his own film "drivers". I'll see if I can locate them &
let
>> you know.
>>
>> Though I can't help you, I'll be watching this thread with interest.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ron Spolarich [SMTP:caesar2@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 1999 9:07 PM
>> To: Olympus List
>> Subject: [OM] Olympus ES-10S Scanner
>>
>> I'm in need of the lists advice - again. Many of you responded to my
>> initial inquiry regarding what scanners list members were using. I
can't
>> recall anyone mentioning using the Olympus ES-10. Several mentioned the
>> Nikon LS-30 as well as the Minolta Dimage Scan Dual. Well, staying true
>to
>> Oly, I decided to purchase the ES-10. After several days of use with
>Adobe
>> Photoshop 5.5 I'm thinking of returning it and purchasing the Nikon.
But
>> before I make that decision, I'd like to be sure it's the right one
given
>> the cost will jump another $500.
>>
>> After becoming fairly familiar with Photoshop, the adage "garbage in
>> garbage out" has credence when it pertains to the number of pixels
>scanned.
>> If one can gamma correct before scanning one has a better image to work
>> with. I also recognize that it isn't necessary nor prudent to scan at
>high
>> res; 200 to 300 is very acceptable. My issue with the ES-10 is that the
>> gamma correction tool is a curve tool. A curve tool is a very
>> sophisticated tool, at least within Adobe Photoshop. I'm not so sure
>with
>> the ES-10. I labor with slides that are very dark yet contain great
>detail
>> when viewed through a light table. If I scan such a slide at 200> dpi,
>> it's almost impossible to lighten the image enough to anywhere near the
>> light table image. If I scan at 72 dpi I have greater results yet this
>> results in fewer pixels. Negatives and slides that have a broad
>histogram
>> look very good. Flash pictures are difficult because they are high key.
>> Is this more a matter of lack of understanding the gamma correction
>tool,
>> dpi scan choice, etc., or is the ES-10 making my life more difficult?
>>
>> What gamma correction tool(s) does the Nikon offer?
>>
>> If my only objective is to scan images for web use, is there any
>advantage
>> to purchasing the Nikon? Is 30 bit color scanning better than 24 bit
>when
>> I'm only posting to the web?
>>
>> Thanks in advance, Ron
>>
>> caesar2@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Ron & Mary Spolarich
>> www.mscollectibles.com
>>
>> << File: ATT00002.htm >>
>>
>> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
>> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
>< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
>< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|