I've sold shots to magazines and through stock houses that were scanned
on the Epson 3200. Most were from 6x7 film of course, but the quality
was very good. At least two appeared as full spreads in a glossy car
mag, one was on a cover. I've also made 11 x 14 prints from 35mm scans
from that same Epson 3200. They appeared to be very sharp and detailed
at normal viewing distance. I've also sold a couple of photos through
the stock house that were scanned from 35mm on that same Epson. Yes, a
film scanner is better, but the Epsons are very good. I've also gotten
very good results with an Agfa Duoscan 4800. That was a $5000 flatbed
that was designed to scan both film and flat art. One of the agencies I
worked for had one on lease five or six years ago. It produced very
nice 4800 dpi scans from 35mm or larger film.
Paul
On Dec 2, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
A flatbed scanner, regardless of what it's called, whether it has
"photo"
in its name or not, whether or not it has an adapter for film, is not
going
to equal a good dedicated film scanner in quality. Only you can
determine
if any flatbed scanner is "good enough" for your needs.
If you want others to tell you if such a scanner will be acceptable,
which
may be difficult to do, you at least have to tell us what you plan to
do
with the scanned result. Large prints? No way. Small web images?
Quite
likely acceptable. Anything in between, maybe <shrug> depending on
~your~
standards and just exactly what the final use will be.
Shel
"You meet the nicest people with a Pentax"
[Original Message]
From: Toralf Lund
So you all say they aren't nearly as good? Well let me ask a
different,
related question, that might help me decide if they are good enough:
Are the "photo" scanners of the type I'm talking about there, much
better at scanning films than "generic" scanners with a film adapter?
I
mean, does the word "photo" in the product designation actually mean
anything? I've tried scanning negs on a HP 55-something (which has a
film adapter, but seems to be designed mainly as a document scanner)
that we have at work, and the results didn't impress me much...
- Toralf
