[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: VERY Interesting Film Scanner Rumor

>Will you, Richard, please explain why such a scanner could not work on
>unexposed film? I think that the main reason might be the need to slice the
>film into thin layers before scanning them -- is that your thinking, too?
>Also, I think that the film would need to be at very low temperature, but
>that is OK -- let's remember, the original post was about a research
I don't disagree that a probe can scan and even detect atoms. The 
analytical methods available to researchers are extremely broad in 
today's world.

There are a lot of reasons why this is bogus.

I have a real problem in any probe detecting just the "proper" atoms, 
then interpreting these (unprocessed atoms) as very particular 
molecules possessing a latent image as they would be resolved 
undergoing a future chemical transformation, and then both 
understanding and then interpreting three dimensional imaging. And, 
doing this properly - meaning with all the dynamics of a picture as 
we now know it. Including grain size manifestations. There is a BIG 
difference between the ability to scan for molecules, or sub,, and 
then interpreting (start thinking about software logic) something 
that has not taken place yet; a process that has not yet been 
activated (chemical process emulation?). And to do this with some non 
destructive (probing) radiation. Yes, layers are a real impediment 
since the latent image is striated, or layered on the Y axis.

Crank into that technical problem the ability to do this properly 
regardless of film type, exposure condition, etc. I have a film (a 
movie film), for example that has a layer which must be removed 
before it can go through a very different chemical process than, say 
C41 films go through. Count the number of film processing variations, 
each directed towards realizing an intended result; push processing, 
or, say different chemical imaging methodologies, of which C41 is one 

Going down the list:

A research project?

Why would anyone want this? You need to answer this. My guess is then 
people might have the "best" of both worlds; e.g. almost infinite 
pixel density which can be translated in to 10 MB file! ?? Has there 
been some secret survey amongst amateur or professional 
photographers, or users of same that are clammering for this? And, if 
it is not market driven, why is some company spending money on doing 
research in an area where there probably is not a payoff? At least in 
this application? The potential application(s) needs to be 
identified. The days of undirected, unbridled research - that every 
PhD doctorate loves to fantasize about - are over. Sure there are 
"accidental" discoveries today. Some even patented. Most - at least 
today - are left on the shelf, never pursued because the reality of 
today's business world is to increase stockholder value in directions 
that Company management agrees are core. Not marginal - "Oh, that is 
interesting" type of digressions. Even with government contracts.

I become occasionally exasperated by some who truly believe that 
"anything" can be done - if we only try or spend money on it. After 
all, they say we got to the moon. If not immediately, they say, then 
tomorrow. If really pushed, they equivocate and say eventually. Go 
into the real scientific world and discover that there really are 
many dead ends. All of this is off - topic, Sorry.

Dick Moyer
Please do not include an entire message in your response. Delete the excess.
http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.


[Photo]     [Photo Printers]    [Yosemite Photos]     [Scanner Discussion]     [Gimp]     [Gimp] Users

Powered by Linux