![]() ![]() But some people are happy with their results using an iphone for backlight. Sometime the enlarger head is better, sometimes not, but the enlarger head is sure a lot quicker. My iphone screen has a CRI of 68, with -26 in R9 (the red swatch) which means in theory it's even worse than 0/100 at rendering reds. -According to my experience, the results will be different from say scanning materials with a flat-bed dual-illuminated scanner that has transparency and negative holders. that's all that matters really.Īnyway CRI isn't a particularly useful measure for real results, I wouldn't sweat it too much unless you get a result that's noticeably shit. People seem happy with their results from most LED panels out there though unless they're really cheap n nasty. ![]() SSI compared to a reference 5000K light source is 69/100. R9 is 74 (bad) R12 also under 80, R13 and R15 under 90. Actually pretty weak color rendering if you're fussy. ![]() For reference, I have a kaiser slimlite plano that I use as a regular light table, and I do own a spectrometer. With brighter bulbs the Negative Supply Light Source Basic makes scanning film with a digital camera more easy and straight forward, allowing you to use lower. Re: 'Scanning' film with Fuji and Light Table In reply to Hrme Reviving an old thread because I would also like to digitise a lot of 35mm negatives (family photographs and travel from my parent st and grandparents) but although I’m reading how using a camera can be much faster I’m not sure it would be the right solution for me. His flash was triggered remotely, using its lowest. Most people don't own color spectrometers, so manufacturers can say whatever they want. The setup involves an empty picture frame braced above a Lastolite softbox to create a DIY light table. It's not really possible to quantify the quality of a light panel if you don't objectively measure it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |