Wednesday, August 30, 2006
DMax and Dynamic Range.
DMax relates to the Maximum Readable Density or the maximum "opacity" achievable in a given medium.
DMin equates to the Minimum Density or a films maximum "transparency".
It has been suggested that the DMin value should reflect the density reading where the detail is still retained in the light areas of an image. Whereas DMax has been described as the darkest area of an image that a scanner can still discern detail from.
Back when I was pulling film for typesetting and printing, we would try to ensure our films were all checked by densitometer and that the darkest areas were kept around a DMax of 4.0.
The ideal range for scanners would be to be a DMin of 0 and a DMax of 4.0 giving a DR of 4. One thing to bear in mind, the capture of dynamic range varies greatly. Factors like sensor type, colour channel, sensor noise and bit conversion depth all play a part. View all manufacturer specifications, with a prove it to me mind set. Probably the best bit of advice I have to offer is, that you should look to third party reviews for information on how well a scanner performs.
One of the best descriptions of Dynamic Range, that I've come across, can be found at photo.net.
Sigma promises new DSLR for Photokina
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Bedouin Ventures, release MicroStock Watcher
MicroStock Watcher currently supports the following agencies:
Dreamstime
Fotolia
iStockphoto
LuckyOliver
Shutterstock
StockXpert
For more information, visit the MicroStock Watcher product page.
Canon USA Produce a White Paper on their Full Frame CMOS Technology
Canon's Full-Frame CMOS Sensors: The Finest Tools for Digital Photography
DPReview Begin Their Coverage Of Photokina 2006
Canon New Products Blitz
Thursday, August 17, 2006
BabelPix™ Keyword Translator
Sunday, August 13, 2006
The theatre of reportage...
I think that reportage should be just that ... any retouching should be kept to a minimum, clean up of dust and removal of corporate logos only. If more is done then a logo should be added which clearly states that the image concerned has been photomanipulated (even better would be to disqualify such imagery from usage in the news media). The press should also endeavour to indicate where the shot has been managed through media handlers, who limit the press representatives access through corralling or by staging a scene, though in reality this is nearly impossible an expectation.
Reportage should be about truth and not about theatre ... if you want theatre watch entertainment ... with the news I want truth. What happens in all cases like this, is a disrespect of the worse kind ... in this case it appears that it is an abuse of the dead, someones children!!!
If your interest has been piqued then visit the Times Online for an intro to a story which upset me almost as much as the war itself.
Nikon Announce 10MP D80 DSLR
Fujifilm USA announce S3 PRo UVIR for Criminal Investigation
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Espon V750-M Pro Vs Microtek i900
After posting a notice back in february on some new scanners by Epson, I was asked recently if I had any comments on the Espon V750-M Pro and how it compares to the Microtek i900, unfortunately having not seen either scanner in action and having no reference files to compare between the two I really cannot accurately comment.
I can make some assuptions though, and those are, that manufacturers claims on DMax are usually generous. So the difference between the Epson and the Microtek will most probably be small. There is an excellent review of the i900 at The Photography Blog and there is also the factor of resolution the V750-M Pro has a higher optical resolution 6400 vs 3200 and the fluid mount technology which I eagerly await seeing results from reviewers lucky enough to get hold of this unit.
You can also read some interesting comments from Ovidiu Predescu someone who has had experience with the V750-M Pro. One other thing to consider is investing in some third party film holders which allow you to optimize the distance between the scanning head and the film. Better Scanning creates custom film holders for a variety of devices including the V series of scanners.
I was going to post this as a response to one of my earlier posts but I needed to post some links and some information which would have been lost. If you are lucky enough to have a friendly digital technology vendor who carries these models you can perhaps arrange to take or send some samples for scanning. Given the difference in the age of the technologies and the differences in optical resolution I'd take a good look at the Epson, also feel free to contact me directly if you have a more specific question relating to the type of media you are using.
Although these types of flatbeds are quite competent as all round units they are not a replacement for dedicated transparency scanners, some of which like the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi PRO claim a DMax of 4.2. In all cases, it is only when you can accurately compare scanned images side by side, when the true capabilities of a scanner come into play. The Wet scan capability of the Epson looks to be a good capability but I'm wondering how much difference it would actually make in comparison to Microteks E.D.I.T.™ and glassless SnapTrans™ solution.
All manufacturers are notorious for making all sorts of claims about their equipments capabilities and it is best to try the scanners you are interested in, if you've been looking at the Epson and the Microtek also look at the Canon flatbeds and Nikons Transparency Scanners. I'm going to follow this up with an article on DMax and just what it means.