This is a great idea.
Given the effort that will be expended by the many with scanners I wonder about trying to maximise this.
Suggestions:
1. I think the 'real world' and the target scan is a good idea. I like the idea of being able to determine non-manufacturers Dmaxs (and actual resolution too)
2. I think the 'as it comes out' part is useful, but many folks will also want to know how much a few simple manipulations (eg the unsharp masking) will help. Perhaps both?
3. I would encourage multiple versions of the same scanner to be used. We all know there is item-item variation, but almost all photogrpahy reports are samples of n=1. It would be nice to change that.
4. Many flames are generated by the 'I cant see any difference...' vs 'Its blindingly obvious...' argument of ... vs ... Could we incorporate an experiment once the scans are done but prior to their general release?
For example this might involve sending the various scans on CD unidentified as to their origin to folks who express interest and asking for a ranking. Alternatively a bunch of scans could be sent which include duplicates and folks be ask if they can pick the difference. We wouldnt need that many people to generate a rank ordering and the reproducibility of judgement.
If there is any interest in this last suggestion, not having a scanner yet I would be happy to help out with distribution etc
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks