DylanDrew said:
yea everyone with a better scanner who actually knows how to use it produces worse scans than you. Ok retard. Every single scan you’ve ever done looks like complete shit. Nobody who actually knows what a good scan looks like would ever waste space on their hdd to download it. Your scans are for Twitter clankers that don’t know any better. There’s a reason you spit when you talk and cant produce a coherent sentence without chat gpt
Dylan, without commenting on PNC17’s work I can tell you there’s a lot of SHIT scans that get done commercially that end up on streaming and on bluray/uhd. You’d be shocked if you actually saw what happens with a lot of workflows.
The dynamic range looks quite limited on PNC17’s screencaps, but not necessarily more than you would see on a lot of commercial scanners that struggle with the density of print. For example take a look at the Alien³ commercial Bluray and you’ll see the same limited dynamic range - except they worked from the negatives to produce it and not a print! It makes me wonder if the backlight is the issue with PNC17’s homebrew scanner.
NC-17peter said:
Anyway to check out the ones you have done so I can get a reference for your standards? thx m8
Well you did Batman on a commercial scanner, just scan a reel on your one and compare the results.