|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
I finally got the opportunity to see what happens by defocusing my Minolta Dual II as a way to reduce dust dirt and grain. The first thing I did was to see who much difference there was between an autofocused slide and one which I manually focus. As I somewhat expected, the manual focusing created a sharper image, by a bit, perhaps a 5% difference. Based upon the fact that as it is the scanner emphasizes DDSG, the last thing to do is "improve" focus any more than necessary. It took several attempts at defocusing using the manual focusing process to figure out how much defocusing occurred based upon the graphic slider control. I finally came up with a difference of about 1/4" difference between the peak focus (contrast) white bar, optimized for highest contrast, and the black bar, which indicates the current contrast/focal position. This creates a noticeably soft result. The "good" part about it is it reduced grain and dirt/dust considerably. The bad part is that although I had many less of the typical speckled type of sharpening artifacts, when I used USM, the amount of USM necessary to make the image look sharp created a different artifact - overly accentuated edge definition. There is probably a middle ground, which would decrease the DDSG while not requiring the need for such high amounts of USM, and when I have the time, I will further experiment to try to find that best point. Unfortunately, however, using defocusing alone cannot resolve the problems with the Minolta scanners, although careful use might diminish some aliasing and other grittiness. Now the question I have is, what exactly is up with Minolta scanners that causes them to so exacerbate DDSG when using what should be a lighting source that diminishes those aspects under most circumstances. Art - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.