Hi James, Before you decide, consider whether you will always be using the
entire area of your 35mm negatives. I do a lot of song bird photography and
song birds are quite small and shy. As a consequence, in order to get an
image that takes up a significant portion of my final print, I'm often
James
I'd be very interested to see other replies to your query, since I'm in a
similar position wanting to upgrade from my lowly FS2710 to one of the newer
4000dpi machines. I've looked at the specifications and read some comments
and summarized it for myself so far:
Nikon 4000:
Pros:
Do not assume that all reconstituted images are created equal.
Short cuts are sometimes taken in translating the file back into an
uncompressed image which might speed up decompression, but not represent
the full nature of the image.
Art
Rob Geraghty wrote:
Dana Trout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In 000b01c11731$edfb72c0$380a@phoenix, Rob Geraghty wrote:
I had a similar problem on my computer. I had to disable the power saving
features. I think the problem was caused by PNP insisting on putting the
SCSI
card and video card on the same IRQ. It would caue hangs when power saving
Thanks! I remember seeing it but did not understand at the time what use it
might be or how to use it. It now becomes clearer that it might be the more
appropriate indicator as you suggest. Thanks for bringing it back into my
memory.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the recommendation; I will take a look and hope that I understand
what I am looking at. :=)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Enoch's Vision,
Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 9:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The only caution that I would add is that not all memory despite the fact
that they are said to be compatible with a given motherboard or with other
DIMMs may not be and may act up in ways other than expected. Apart of the
obvious differences between PC 100 and PC 133 RAM or ECC and non-ECC
Yes, so I have been told. I stand corrected and less ignorant than I was
prior to having the meaning of system resources explained. I do appreciate
everyone's patience with me and helpful explanations, Despite my wrongfully
using the wrong indicator, my experiences still remain the same
Thank you Pat. That was a most illuminating and helpful description of what
the hell system resources is and does as well as how it works in WIN 98. I
already know some of this but did not really understand it until your
response. It may be because it was an excellent response or because I
Neither did I which is why, evidently wrongly, chose to use the system
resource meter as my indicator. I do know that I get fewer out of memory
messages when using Photoshop, when scanning, and the like than I did before
adding the memory above 512MB. The only place where I sometimes run out of
I appreciate all the feedback to date. It seems that the SS4000 is the tried
and true choice, a scanner with a track record. Roger's point about software
being no substitute for resolution/dpi is well taken. Does the stated
manufacturer's dpi spec. correlate exactly with how many lpi you get
Hello, any good and bad comment between those two scanners? Any comparison???
It sound the 8000 better although cost more money; is it worth to spend more to
justify that more cost?
TIA; Andrea
--
Fratelli Alinari Photo Archives and Museum
A comparison of the LS4000 and some Imacon, a while back, seemed to indicate
that the LS4000 has resolution roughly equal to the Imacon's 3200dpi (some
parts of a test image were better, others worse).
Does anyone have a thorough understanding of this? Have I got the wrong end
of the stick?
B.Rumary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
full, when the freezing starts again! Anyone any ideas on how to cure
this?
Try the gigabyte newsgroup since you have a GA motherboard, although
I suspect an ATI discussion group may be more productive.
alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte
PNP is a wonderful
Now that I see you are stating load times for uncompressed files I see
our times are much more similar. LZW compression is very CPU-intensive
and there is no comparison between load times for non-compressed and
compressed files (other than compressed files take a *lot* longer).
I compress TIFFs
Thanks Jawed and Maris for your further comments about the problem here with the
monitor Standby function hanging the computer.
I should have tried this earlier, but installing the latest G450 driver from Matrox
looks so far to have solved it. Matrox say to delete the present driver in
for other folks out there who are looking evaluating scanners in the $1K
range, I have just found another evaluation of the Canoscan 4000
(http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/Canoscan4000.html )
Mr. Koren's site is quite extensive and covers other general digital darkroom
topics,
David,
For me, the scanning software of choice is vuescan.
I am holding-up purchasing a MF scanner until either the Nikon 8000 or
Polaroid 120 is supported by VueScan.
As I understand it, vuescan does not support the 120, because Ed has not
gotten a loaner from Polaroid. IMHO, for a company
800 CDs. Man I nearly fainted - need some chocolate, quick...
My music collection is around that size, and it makes me stutter just
thinking about the improbability of enjoying it properly.
I use JPEG quality 10 to archive my scans - my 36MB 8-bit, full res scans
drop to a cosy 2 to 5MB - the
A comparison of the LS4000 and some Imacon, a while back, seemed to indicate
that the LS4000 has resolution roughly equal to the Imacon's 3200dpi (some
parts of a test image were better, others worse).
Does anyone have a thorough understanding of this? Have I got the wrong end
of the stick?
I was going to suggest the latest Matrox drivers, but I haven't been
following the thread that closely and didn't want to repeat what should
have been the first thing tried.
Matrox has an uninstall program you can download from their web site. I've
used it before for the same purpose. It also
I appreciate all the feedback to date. It seems that the SS4000 is the tried
and true choice, a scanner with a track record. Roger's point about software
being no substitute for resolution/dpi is well taken. Does the stated
manufacturer's dpi spec. correlate exactly with how many lpi you get in
Hi Dana,
I have just scanned an image and saved it as compressed and
non-compressed files. This particular image surprised me in that it
compressed to a remarkable degree, from 55.3mb to 16.5mb. I presume
different images will compress to different degrees depending on their
content.
It was my understanding that Ed had the driver working as I have supplied
him with documentation some months ago. If he needs a scanner I can arrange
for that as well.
David
-Original Message-
From: Asael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 7:24 PM
To: [EMAIL
Thys,
Do not make the mistake of comparing OD specifications from various
manufacturers and deciding the highest number wins. They are absolutely not
comparable as no two manufactures use the same technique.
David
-Original Message-
From: Thys [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
In all of the correspondence I've followed on this site, I've hardly
encountered anything relating to Microtek's top contender in the dedicated
35mm scanning category. I've had the FireWire version on order for a while:
the specs seem good, the ScanWizard Pro software is easy to use, and it
26 matches
Mail list logo
