On 10/19/05, Piers Hemy <piers@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I can't see anything to comment on in the A200 pics, Boris, sorry.
>
> As for the OM pics - why surely the scanner you used was making some
> exposure calculation for itself? Is that not where the "exposure variation"
> arises? More specifically, the leftmost frame would have been the most
> dense, which the scanner would have overexposed to get back to something
> like 18% gray on average. Or so it seems to me.
Good call with that, I was thinking in camera exposure in my
suggestion but scanner exposure could explain it too. I know with
Vuescan you can lock the exposure and keep it from adjusting for each
scan, very handy for this type of thing.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|