[STOCKPHOTO] Manual focusing with Nikon 4000 / 5000 - focusing range
Jacques Jangoux
Hello All,
I posted this on another forum but having no reply I will try here.
For those of you who still scan, use a Nikon Coolscan 4000 or 5000,
and do manual focusing, what range do you consider acceptable? I
usually measure the center, then 4 points each about 3/4 toward each
corner, plus any important part of the picture. Depending on the
curvature of the transparency, I have low ranges between extremes
starting at about 4 points (especially if pictures are fresh from the
lab and still flat), and high ranges of 15 or more. I consider that
between 4 and 8-9 I am safe, the image will be sharp and QC will
accept it; from 9-10 to 12-13 it will probably be sharp enough for
Alamy QC; at 14 or more I begin to worry; you can start to see soft
areas where the individual pixels disappear. Sometimes letting the
picture heat up in the scanner and doing a second scan betters the
score; or turning the picture around, placing it upside down. Any data
from others will be appreciated.
By the way the pdf manual of the Nikon 5000 says that Digital Ice is
the same as on the 9000 and can be used with Kodachrome. Any practical
confirmation?
Thank you for replies.
Jacques Jangoux
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Find the message you want faster. Visit your group to try out the improved message search.
__,_._,___
Jim Hargan
I would like to apologize to Jacques and the group for this late
posting.
I start by finding the high point and the low point. The high point is
usually off center a bit, and the low point is in the opposite corner.
If the difference between these is 20 or less, I just split the
difference. If the difference is more than 20 (my record is 45), part
of the image will inevitably become blurred. At this point I can
either decide which parts of the image to place out of focus; or I can
scan the image twice (at different focus settings) and combine the
two scans in Photoshop with a mask layer.
I seem to recall an earlier thread that said the 9000 focuses no
better than the 4000/5000 -- and that's the reason I haven't moved up
yet. I'd like to know if I'm wrong about that.
Jim Hargan
Images of North Carolina
nc.harganonline.com
www.harganonline.com
--- In STOCKPHOTO@yahoogroups.com, "Jacques Jangoux" <jangoux@...> wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I posted this on another forum but having no reply I will try here.
>
> For those of you who still scan, use a Nikon Coolscan 4000 or 5000,
> and do manual focusing, what range do you consider acceptable? I
> usually measure the center, then 4 points each about 3/4 toward each
> corner, plus any important part of the picture. Depending on the
> curvature of the transparency, I have low ranges between extremes
> starting at about 4 points (especially if pictures are fresh from the
> lab and still flat), and high ranges of 15 or more. I consider that
> between 4 and 8-9 I am safe, the image will be sharp and QC will
> accept it; from 9-10 to 12-13 it will probably be sharp enough for
> Alamy QC; at 14 or more I begin to worry; you can start to see soft
> areas where the individual pixels disappear. Sometimes letting the
> picture heat up in the scanner and doing a second scan betters the
> score; or turning the picture around, placing it upside down. Any data
> from others will be appreciated.
>
> By the way the pdf manual of the Nikon 5000 says that Digital Ice is
> the same as on the 9000 and can be used with Kodachrome. Any practical
> confirmation?
>
> Thank you for replies.
>
> Jacques Jangoux
>
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Find the message you want faster. Visit your group to try out the improved message search.
__,_._,___
Duvina
I've been hearing about this and was just talking to someone earlier today.
They told me the Nikons have focus issues and I was a little surprised by
this. I shoot with a Panasonic Lumix and it's got a 12x optical zoom, the
down side is I can't change lenses, but from what I've been hearing my lense
is actually better quality then the Nikon. Now I'm not so sure I want to
get a Nikon. I'm already used to high quality focus and clearity, but I
really need to be able to change lenses, anyone have other suggestions or
info about camera's in the DSLR class that are not Nikon?
Bec Thomas Photography
http://www.photostockplus.com/home_becthomasphotography
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
> Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
> STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
> STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Find the message you want faster. Visit your group to try out the improved message search.
__,_._,___
John Fowler
--- In STOCKPHOTO@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Hargan" <lists@...> wrote:
>
> I would like to apologize to Jacques and the group for this late
> posting.
>
> I start by finding the high point and the low point. The high point
is
> usually off center a bit, and the low point is in the opposite
corner.
> If the difference between these is 20 or less, I just split the
> difference. If the difference is more than 20 (my record is 45),
part
> of the image will inevitably become blurred. At this point I can
> either decide which parts of the image to place out of focus; or I
can
> scan the image twice (at different focus settings) and combine the
> two scans in Photoshop with a mask layer.
>
> I seem to recall an earlier thread that said the 9000 focuses no
> better than the 4000/5000 -- and that's the reason I haven't moved
up
> yet. I'd like to know if I'm wrong about that.
>
I don't understand this procedure. Where can I learn more about it
and learn how to apply it?
I'm using a 4000, for some years now. I select a focus point
depending on the image and go with auto everything else. No
complaints yet. Of course, I'm dealing primarily with
textbook/brochure use, so perhaps it doesn't matter.
But I have a lot of slides yet to be scanned and some have
potential for more significant uses. I'd like those scans to be the
best I can produce - I'm not interested in upgrading scanners.
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Find the message you want faster. Visit your group to try out the improved message search.
__,_._,___