Art,
> So, in conclusion, I don't think necessarily the other scanners don't > have some of the same mechanical problems the Nikon manifests, it is > just that the design of the other scanners tends to HIDE these problems > by the way they capture and reconstruct the image, while, in fact, the > Nikon LS-8000 would drastically EMPHASIZE these defects by its design > and manner of reconstruction the image. I'd like to add here that, apparently, the LS-4000 ED has the same problem, since it also uses a 3-line sensor. I'm not sure how large the effect is in that case. > Unfortunately, so far, at any cost approaching reasonable, these factors > apparently cannot be designed out of scanners yet, and Nikon, it would > appear, did not factor these physical limitations into the LS-8000. In > fact, this banding problem showed up long before the LS-8000, in some of > the LS-2000 models. I suspect it was further aggravated by the size of > the structures needed in the LS-8000 to handle larger film sizes. I > also suspect this banding problem will become more noticeable with aging > of the device, as tolerances get sloppier still. Really? As far as I can tell, none of the previous scanners had more than one CCD line (LS-2000 certainly didn't), and all Nikon Coolscans had a LED light source, so where did the banding come from? > If I knew that my last name translates from higher German to "Eureka!" > or "Enlightenment". Actually, "endlich" means "at last", and there is no such word in German as "entlich". And I'm not a military official either. Andras =========================================================================== Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://andras.webhop.org/ =========================================================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body