Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,990   Posts: 1,524,131   Online: 1148
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,801
    And to make robot which will, after computer determine correct exposure and contrast, make filter adjustment on colour or VC enlarger head (simillar like Heiland's Splitgrade enlarger head module), and beside that will place appropriate masks for dodging and burning. That means only what one will have to do is to place negative and paper on its place, everything else would computer/robot do...

  2. #12
    Timothy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Toronto
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    199
    Images
    14
    This sounds like a system that already exists. This is the link to the description. I realize your idea was to project a conventional image onto a scanner and then manipulate the computer file to get a "printing recipe". The 504DS uses a computer file to project onto conventional printing paper. In practice, I do not see a lot of difference.

    Tim R

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,940
    To answer Harris, yes I want the thing to do everything for you EXCEPT how the print looks like. You make all the adjustments until the image on the screen looks the way you like it and then it will make the print, THE OLD FASHION WAY, projecting the image using the enlarger on the piece of photographic paper. That is the objective.

    To answer Timothy, NO I do not wish to expose the paper with a digitized computer file. I don't want in any way digital to get into the actual making of the print. The scanner, computer, software etc.. is only to determine paper grade, exposure time and aperture etc... And no my idea is not to manipulate the digital file, but rather manipulate the setting on the enlarger, VC filter, aperture, time etc.. so that the scanner while simulating a piece of paper showing you what you want in the final print.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,801
    Chan, I understand, I was joking...

    That would be something like combination of already already existing Jobo, Rh designs, Heiland... products, but on steroides.

    Joking again, cant resist...

  5. #15
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Wouldn't a negative scanner do this?


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,940
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K
    Wouldn't a negative scanner do this?
    Yes and no. I have successfully using a film scanner as an analyzer for my color negative printing. There are a few problems with this approach, any adjustments on the enlarger (filtration, brightness, aperture etc..) must be measured separately and very accurately and input into the scan. This can be very difficult on most enlarger as when you stop the lens down a stop is it really a stop or 1.1 or 0.9 stop? When I dial in an extra 20cc of magenta is it really 20cc or 30 or 15?
    Using a scanner illuminated by the image projected directly by the enlarger would solve these problems.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    I heard of a project once where somebody took a scanner, removed the light source, and put it in the back of a large-format camera. The result was, essentially, a large-format digital camera. Unfortunately, I didn't save the URL, but a Google search turned up this page, which very briefly describes a similar (perhaps the same) project.

    I mention this because it's a similar application of scanner technology, in the sense that you'd need to disable the scanner's light source in both cases. One big problem with your proposal is that flatbed scanners don't capture an entire two-dimensional image at once; they've got a scan head that moves along the document to be scanned. This means that if you were to adapt an existing scanner to this task, it wouldn't be very useful for previewing dodging and burning effects, just the main exposure. Also, I'm not at all sure that a typical enlarger would put out enough light to register -- compare the brightness of an enlarger's image to the amount of light that a scanner generates.

    Assuming these technical limitations aren't an issue, I think the tricky part of your proposal would be writing the software to respond to the scanned image in roughly the way that photographic paper would, enabling you to see the effects of your contrast manipulations.

  8. #18
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,625
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran
    I have this idea similar to the of the analyzer pro but taking a step further. I would call it the "NO FUN Analyzer" as it would take all the fun out of enlarging. Well it's basically a flat bed scanner without the light source or the top lid. You would put it where the easel is and project the image on the flat bed. The scanner would then scan the image and with a time value enter by you to the computer it would display on the screen an image that looks like your final print. Adjustment then can be made to get the image you want. Once you get the image you like on the monitor and then use the same setting for your print. Of course, it would have to be calibrated for the type of paper you use.
    Chan Tran
    This is basically how we print fibre base prints from digital files, except there is no need for the scanner and laser *red, green and blue* light provides the illumination to expose the paper.
    you can adjust density, contrast, overall and locally on the computer and then that information is translated to the output of the light from the lasers and applied to the paper.

    I think that your idea is good, but where I think it falls short is. yes you can read the light from the enlarger and basically see it on screen , but how are you going to make all your local adjustments and apply them to the paper???
    What device is going to send the light to the paper with all the changes and dodges and burns that your require.??

    I would be interested in hearing how you continue with this idea of yours.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,940
    thanks Bob, But no my idea is not to expose the paper any different than one would normally do in the darkroom. The idea is to provide what I shall call "paper simulator" which will display on screen what your print would look like with a certain settings on your enlarger without actually having to make the print. Well I may call it "
    digital test strip". But the actual process of exposing the paper is done in the normal way.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran
    thanks Bob, But no my idea is not to expose the paper any different than one would normally do in the darkroom. The idea is to provide what I shall call "paper simulator" which will display on screen what your print would look like with a certain settings on your enlarger without actually having to make the print. Well I may call it "
    digital test strip". But the actual process of exposing the paper is done in the normal way.
    Actually, I'd call it a "super-enhanced darkroom light meter," because its goal is basically the same as that of a light meter: to tell you the correct exposure and paper contrast to use to get an optimum print. It'd just be much more flexible in the information it would produce -- an image on the computer screen that attempts to simulate what you'll get from a print, vs. a few numbers out of a conventional darkroom light meter.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin