Consensus on scanner reviews says that 2900dpi (LS IV) is perfect up to A4, but you really want 4000dpi (LS 4000) for A3.
Of course the days of digital cameras, 'ressing-up' and geniune fractals has reduced expectancies in this respect... > -----Original Message----- > From: P�l Jensen [mailto:paaljensen@;sensewave.com] > Sent: 30 October 2002 16:47 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm film scanners > > > Dan wrote: > > > The Scan Dual III looks like a significant improvement over the Scan > > Dual II and with a street price 25% less than what I paid > for my Dual > > II back when they came out. > http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEW1.HTM > > has a preliminary > review of the SD III up. Only place I've come across > > so far. BTW B&H shows them in stock for $300. > > > It get excellent reviews and they claim it is better than > anything available for desktop use even a few years back. > However, what does this mean? As a novice in these matters > I'm a bit confused. Is this scanner good enough to get high > quality prints from an Epson 2100 printer? > > Obviosly I want the best quality possible at the lowest cost > possible. I plane to use a cheap(?) 35mm film scanner for > 35mm and the sucessor to the Epson 2450 for MF. My main usage > will be high(?) quality prints with the 2100. Does this makes sense? > > > P�l > >
