In the long run a film scanner is the way to go IMHO. However to get your feet wet at a realatively low cost you might try Kodak Photo CD's. (Kodak no longer supports this service, but a good commercial processing house should have the capability). I've gone this way for the last 7 years and have obtained very acceptable scans). Around here I can get a Photo CD scan (with 5 levels of resolution per scan) for under $2.00 US per scan. I recently purchased a Nikon Supercool Scan 4000 ED so I won't be going the Photo CD route any longer. Ken Waller
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: OT film scanner dynamic range I really have to find some method of getting prints from my slides. My SO has a terrific printer and PS so I think a film scanner is the way to go. I've been stalling because my previous PS experiments greatly exceeded my low frustration tolerance and the film scanner articles I read weren't all that encouraging. PS should be far more intuitive than it is but I digress. Anyway, reading between the lines of the film scanner articles leads me to believe that they can't cover the complete tonal range of a slide and that I would either have to scan for the highlights or shadows or scan for both separately and then blend them. That's too annoying to even contemplate. I want to spend my time taking pictures not fooling around with this damned computer. My other option is to shoot 2 1/4" internegatives and then get lab prints made from those or make 35mm copies from my slides. What's the deal with film scanners? Will one frustrate me to the point that I'll only find it useful for ballistics experiments or is the dynamic range issue really not that big a deal? Should I go with a scanner, do the 2 1/4" internegative route, the 35mm negative route or just stick with my light box and loupe? Tom (but you can call me Luddite) Reese PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
