[alt-photo] Re: Densitometer vs Scanner

[Globe Trotteur]

just an update...Re calibrating my X-rite fixed all the weird values i was getting.I am good now.thanks for the advice..Pierre
 > Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 11:39:13 -0700
> From: fdfragomeni at gmail.com
> To: alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org
> Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Densitometer vs Scanner
> 
> Pierre,
> 
> Looks like we have the same densitometer. Mine is an 810 as well (at least
> I think it is as thats sounds familar and I googled it and it looks the
> same as mine. I'm not home at the moment to check but I'm 99% sure thats
> what it is). It isn't entirely unusual to see a very slight variance in
> readings and as Kevin said, it could be due to slight fluctuations in
> voltage. From what I understand, Kevin is also right in that the
> densitometer is reading to the thrid place and rounding up in the value
> that it displays. This makes it more precise in its readings. If you
> haven't calibrated it recently you should definitely do that. If you don't
> have the calibration step tablet and ceramic plate, X-Rite will send you a
> set for a price. I can't remember but when I replaced mine I think it was
> around $200.
> 
> -Francesco
> 
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Kevin Morris <kmorris at stouffer.net> wrote:
> 
> > 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<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<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>
> >> >
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>
> >>
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/**listinfo<http://altphotolist.org/listinfo>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo