[alt-photo] Re: Densitometer vs Scanner

[Kevin Morris]

I believe all the X-rite 810 models only read to two places. If you are 
getting a reading of 1.20 and sometimes 1.19 or 1.21 your calibration step 
wedge could actually be reading to the third place such as 1.206 and 
rounding up to 1.21. The .01 shift could be attributed to slight voltage 
variances. Our 810 is usually very stable but it will occasionally vary a 
tiny amount. The X-Rite 310 that we use for most of our production is a bit 
more finicky. There are days that it will need to be calibrated after every 
sheet that is being density inspected.

It is our rule to always check the calibration of the densitometer before a 
sheet of film is ever read.

Kevin Morris
Stouffer Industries

-----Original Message----- 
From: Globe Trotteur
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 11:42 AM
To: alt-photo process-list
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Densitometer vs Scanner


Well, when i sample a value with my densitometer, sometimes it gives me a 
value of 1.2 and sometimes 1.19 or 1.21. Is that normal? I have the X-rite 
810. I need to recalibrate it too. have not dione that in a while.So if i 
have 4 patches that i am sampling and they vary with 0.01, should I assume 
that they have the same values? The scanner will assume that.Thanks.PO
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:10:08 -0700
> From: fdfragomeni at gmail.com
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Densitometer vs Scanner
>
> I have both my X-Rite densitometer (can't remember which model but it is
> both reflection and transmission) and the densitometer (which is produced
> my X-Rite as well) in my Epson V750Pro scanner and while the Epson is a
> great piece of technology and I love it as a scannner, my X-Rite
> densitometer is a precision machine designed for one specific purpose and 
> I
> carefully keep it calibrated. I trust my X-Rite densitometer far more then
> I'd trust the densitometer in the scanner when it comes to the most
> important things.
>
> If you have a trusted densitometer and you keep it calibrated I would
> probably go with that one. The densitometer in the scanner is more then
> capable and an excellent option for anyone who doens't already own a
> trusted dedicated densitometer but it is just a different piece of
> technology and is not a dedicated and maintained device (meaning you
> actively keep it calibrated in the same way that you would with a 
> dedicated
> device). My $0.02, other's may have other opinions.
>
> -Francesco
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Globe Trotteur
> <unglobetrotteur at hotmail.com>wrote:
>
> >
> > While calibrating the new Ilford Art paper, i tried both with my
> > densitometer and my scanner. Now my question is, which one is more
> > accurate.My X-rite densitometer is showing different values for pure 
> > white
> > than the scanner does. It could be that the textured paper is affecting 
> > the
> > readings.Which method should I trust more?Thanks.Pierre-O
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo

_______________________________________________
Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo