On 9/8/04 4:32 PM, Brad Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have
it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing.
I have not been a conspicuous presence on this list, mostly lurking for a
couple of years. I have
Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of
them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas,
including actual practice - are still around.
Flattery will get you everywhere you smooth talker you; but on these sorts
of lists flattery will only get you in
Jules,
Actually, that makes sense to me too - would you suggest what we might
address best here? Scanners seem about done as a topic - they'll be around
for a while, but they are more like appliances than specialized equipment
and a lot of the issues have been addressed. I would like to keep
Hi,
Before this list goes away completely, I have a question.
Sometime ago, I seem to recall that someone reported taking apart a Polaroid
SprintScan 4000 to clean either the CCD/light or the gears, or both. I also
think I recall that the one caveat was to be very careful in handling the
wiring
Date sent: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:13:02 -0700
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Ed Lusby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[filmscanners] Re: Raw files in Vuescan
I believe incorrect cropping can lead to
Myles,
You're right, the colors would not be affected, but, as I said before, I
believe the exposure times could be affected, if the black/white strip is
of significant size. I don't know what significant size is exactly,
that' why I suggested you look for clipping in highlights and loss of
Hmmm...maybe I was a bit premature about my complaints. The batch I
ran last night cropped perfectly. Now, if I can only figure out what
I did to fix it
Stay tuned!
Carlisle
Unsubscribe by mail to
I believe incorrect cropping can lead to autoexposure problems. If there is
a significant area of black, for example, vuescan would tend to overexpose
the raw scan, resulting in clipped highlights. You might check your scans
for clipped highlights. If it's a small enough black area, it won't be
At 11:13 AM -0700 8/25/04, Ed Lusby wrote:
[snip]
Auto cropping remains to be a problem in vuescan. The problem seems to vary
with scanner and certainly vuescan version, as Ed has made many recent
attempts to improve auto cropping lately. However, vuescan 8.0.4 remains
the best version for me in
Hi Carlisle,
I haven't worked through the cropping issues with the latest version of
vuescan myself. I'm currently using 8.0.11 (8.0.13 is latest?), which
leaves a small black border at the top (most of the time). It hasn't
interfered with what I'm currently doing, so I've just ignored it. There
I've been dealing with this little problem ever since I first picked up an
LS-20, then upgraded to an LS-4000 w/roll/slide feeders.
Short answer: if you're willing to accept NOT having 100% of scannable area
in your final scan, you can easily set the crop area (for slide at least) to
within a
Ed,
I think what I'm trying to get at is: Given a person with good Photoshop
skills, is it an easier path to simply scan the neg in and modify it in
Photoshop vs tweaking it in the scanning program and modifying it with the
scan software?
I'm coming from the viewpoint that the scanning software,
There are several things that film scanner software do whiich are difficulat
if not impossible to do with post scanner image editing programs such as
Photoshop.
1. Many scanner software permits the user to do multi-pass scans which may
enable one to capture additional detail in the shadow areas
1. Many scanner software permits the user to do multi-pass scans which may
enable one to capture additional detail in the shadow areas of positive
films or the highlight areas of negative films.
2. Many scanner software packages have digital ICE3 provisions which rely
on the scanner's
Yes the Minolta DSMP can scan Xpan at 4800, and also
offers excellent Dmax. I utilise the multi-format
holder for Xpan, but others have adapted 35mm holders.
___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger -
all new features - even more fun!
At 20:11 -0400 2004/08/09, Les Berkley wrote:
I got a Dmax-Dmin of about 3.4 with my LS-2000; I would expect better from
the 4000.
Les
I have had the LS2000 and am presently a very contented owner of an LS4000.
The LS4000 picks out a far better range IMHO, especially in the darks and
lights than
I use one and it seems to work quite well. One, in theory, could scan a
roll of film unattended.
Jack
Dr. Terry Hemmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
08/07/2004 08:21 PM
Please respond to filmscanners
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:
Thanks for all the reply's. At the moment, I'm considering opening up the scanner
but on second thought I'll leave it alone for now. I may just get a better scanner.
I'm rather disappointed with the limited D-range of this scanner, which is really
only about 3.2. I'm not sure if mirror alignment
On Aug 9, 2004, at 07:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use one and it seems to work quite well. One, in theory, could scan a
roll of film unattended.
fergit theory... that's what I do all the time. chuckle
Slice off the leader up to frame 1, throw it in, let it do thumbnail
preview scans of
Hi!
Minolta DSMP has an option to scan MF at 4800 PPI, but you have probably to
utilize the MF holder.
I have a DSMP, but I mostly scan 6x7.
Best regards
Erik
Monday 09 August 2004 17.26 skrev W Shumaker:
Thanks for all the reply's. At the moment, I'm considering opening up the
scanner
I got a Dmax-Dmin of about 3.4 with my LS-2000; I would expect better from
the 4000.
Les
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of W Shumaker
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 11:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon
I say in theory because I've gone off and left it over night only to
find that it hasn't finished scanning the entire roll upon my return in
the morning :(
Jack
Dieder Bylsma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
08/09/2004 12:04 PM
Please respond to filmscanners
To:
if you feel the need to dissect your Nikon LS4000, this will prove to be
useful:
http://www.pearsonimaging.com/ls5000cleaning.html
I used this as a guide for my LS4000 to clean off dust from the mirror. You
can skip step 3 since there are no screws under the feet of the scanner, but
the rest is
Does anyone have any experience with the Nikon SA-30 35mm roll film
adapter on an LS-4000ED ?
Terry H.
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe
Does anyone have any experience with the Nikon SA-30 35mm roll film
adapter on an LS-4000ED ?
yup. works great. takes up to 40 frames at a go. sure beats doing it 6 frames
at a time, let alone a single frame at a time.
Dieder
I have never noticed a rotation problem with my scanner (though I've
never done any scanning where lack of rotation would be critical),
and doubt that there is any mechanical adjustment designed for the
consumer to use. --Bill
At 5:55 PM -0400 8/5/04, W Shumaker wrote:
I've asked this before,
From: Bill Fernandez
I have never noticed a rotation problem with my scanner (though I've
never done any scanning where lack of rotation would be critical),
and doubt that there is any mechanical adjustment designed for the
consumer to use. --Bill
It might be possible to tell what the
This might sound tongue-in-cheek, but have you considered setting up a
script in Photoshop (or GraphicConverter if you use a Mac) to rotate your
photos? I don't know of any setting in the scanner or in the scanner
software. I think that you can see that, yes, I have experienced it.
A
W Shumaker
Didier wrote:
I'd like to save the infraredchannel in step1 (64bit file) and then
choose in step2 the right IR filter options for each picture
(None/light/medium/heavy)
I must have misunderstood something, as it doesn't work for me.
My setup is different to yours (Windows + Minolta Scan
Ed's about 1/2 way through a 2 week vacation. He often answers questions at
the newsgroup
comp.periphs.scanners
He's corrected a couple of problems that I've communicated to him there.
Regards,
Ed Lusby
It's a pity Ed Hamrick doesn't come anymore on this forum.
Cheers.
Didier
Hi all
I use a two steps worflow inside Vuescan (MMP/MacOSX) :
1) scan my color negs and save rawfiles
2) scan these rawfiles later and save 48bits Tiffs
I'd like to save the infraredchannel in step1 (64bit file) and then
choose in step2 the right IR filter options for each picture
I use a Minolta Dimage 5400 and I don't think the IR channel information can be saved
so you cannot use IR when 'scanning'
from file.
I think the time to do this is at first scan anyway so that the raw file you save is
as good as it can be.
Peter
Le 28 juil. 04, à 12:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I use a Minolta Dimage 5400 and I don't think the IR channel
information can be saved so you cannot use IR when 'scanning'
from file.
I think the time to do this is at first scan anyway so that the raw
file you save is as good as it
Hi!
I just tought about writing down some thoughts about printing and color.
Printers and monitors have different gamuts that is color ranges they can
reproduce. Also monitors emit light, while prints reflect light. This basic
differrence means that it is hard to compare colors on screen and
Printers and monitors have different gamuts that is color ranges
they can reproduce. Also monitors emit light, while prints reflect
light. This basic differrence means that it is hard to compare colors
on screen and paper.
Correct. Printers and monitors also have different color spaces as
Yes there are a number of tools out there for calibrating and profiling
monitors; but most of them do not work very well on consumer flat screen
monitors; they work best on CRTs. Similarly, making an accurrate custom
printer profile is not as easy as it may seem. The programs you mention can
Hi there is a tool called Profile Mechanic - Monitor which can calibrate a
monitor for 179 USD. Personally I use a Colorvision Monitor Spyder with
OptiCal för PC Mac which is around 300 USD, here in Sweden.
Regarding printer profiles there are probably prepared profiles for your
printer.
RantMode=On
Does it bug anyone else that so many of these tests are run at small
apertures? Too few are at f/5.6 or f/8 where a typical good prime is at
its best. It's not like subjects hundreds of feet away need f/16 for DOF,
so the lenses are needlessly handicapped by diffraction.
First of all, I wouldn't consider the test to be valid bearing teh huge
gap in lens qualities.
You'apparently putting Hasselblad's lens (i.e. Zeiss ine, even though
zoom) against this all-in-one kind 28-300 Tamron turist's orineted
zoom. I think to provide correct base under your estimation, you
Norm,
Although both of the below sites compare the 1DS
(similar to your SLR/n) with a Rollei and a Mamiya 7
(more sq. mm than your Hassy), I found the sites to be
informative and ran tests much better than I could
hope to do.
http://www.photographical.net/canon_1ds_mf.html
Norm,
I think you're on target with the what works approach but will echo
the comments about the Tamron 28-300. I have the 28-200, which is fine
but a friends 28-300 is disapointingly soft. If memory serves, that was
also noted in reviews of the lens (and photography mags tend only to
damn with
Hi Al,
I believe both Austin and David have provided you with information on
the specifics of why moiré is more likely to occur on a digicam image
than a scanned film image.
I do not know how much of the technical jargon provided was
comprehensible, so I will try to simplify the message,
He apparently doesn't realize that Tamron and Tokina make privately branded
lenses for a number of camera mfg. I've always found both brands to be very
satisfactory. Which is how they test out, also.
Berry,
If you are going to be swapping images files with others or sending images
off to a printer, then the first thing you must do is profile/calibrate your
monitor. Otherwise what you see on your monitor will not be the same as what
anyone else will see with the same image. The Eyeone display
Bob,
I would only add a qualifier to one statement you have made. You say: OR,
you can do it the manual way by
using the sliders in Advanced page of the printer driver to make the prints
more/less contrasty, more/less bright, and more/less of r,g, or b. My
qualification is that this manual
First, unless you have a really high end flat panel monitor, costing in the
$1000 us range, you will have difficulty calibrating and profileing the
monitor display. Current consumer and prosumer models of flat panel
displays tend not to lend themselves to calibrating and profiling with the
Hi folks,
I was looking at some 5 megapixel (Canon G5) sample images to get
some idea how the might compare against my 2820 dpi scanner. I know
I have read in the past that, despite the large difference in file sizes and
pixel counts, a 5MP camera isn't as far behind a 2820 dpi scanner as it
on 7/14/04 8:48 PM, Norm Carver at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am in the midst of doing a basic comparison between my Hasselblad and the
new Kodak SLR Pro (14mb, full frame). I don't need a super accurate test,
just reasonably fair. My work is half color, half bw with the end product
in books
Hi!
My suggestion would be:
- Scan at highest resolution on the Multi Pro (3200 PPI for 120 format)
- Decide on a given print size, like 70x50 cm and a given resolution like 300
DPI.
- Crop the pictures to corresponding format in Photoshop (or whatever you use)
- Scale the image to your format
Here is Epson's response:
Photoshop Elements has a certail level of color control built in to the
application but i not advanced enough to handle the full capabiities of ICC
profiles. Photoshop Elements 2 has slightly more support, but the full
range of features and ways to apply the
Berry,
That's a question to toss to the folks at Adobe. Unless you're doing
real critical work, you probably don't need the profiles (sounds like
heresy, I know). Getting custom profiles done can be an expensive
proposition.
Bernie
Berry Ives wrote:
Here is Epson's response:
Photoshop
on 7/13/04 8:47 AM, Bernie Kubiak at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Berry,
That's a question to toss to the folks at Adobe. Unless you're doing
real critical work, you probably don't need the profiles (sounds like
heresy, I know). Getting custom profiles done can be an expensive
proposition.
I,
I have a Mac (G4 dual) and a P4 - both have 512 Mbyte, both more than 100 GB
room (I still run out of space). Yes, the Mac has a place it spools for the
printer - it is buried under the Drive 1/OS/system/god knows what/etc. IT
isn't the problem. I also have a p2000 printer. I ran into
I have a scanned image that is 17.6 MB. I am trying to print it on an Epson
2200, 13x19 @1440dpi. I am getting an error after the printer driver has
initiated, prior to anything actually going out to the printer, saying that
there is not enough memory for this operation, and to close any
If you read the manual closely, you will find that SHE is a HE. :-)
First, how many physical hard drives do you have (1, 2, 3, ...); and if you
only have one or two physical hard drives, how many partiions is each broken
down into and what size are they?
Second, how large is the partition that
on 7/11/04 4:41 PM, Laurie Solomon at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you read the manual closely, you will find that SHE is a HE. :-)
First, how many physical hard drives do you have (1, 2, 3, ...); and if you
only have one or two physical hard drives, how many partiions is each broken
down
What do you mean by read the manual? [:~[:~[:~]]
Just being cute in an attempt to keep things on the light side while
informing you that I am a male.
There is no printer spooler folder on a Mac.
There has to be one, although it may not be called that. If there is not
one, where are the files
Hello, if there's anybody out there.
I have a problem using PS Elements 1.0. I know there is a list for PS, but
maybe one of you folks can make this easy.
I have a scanned image that is 17.6 MB. I am trying to print it on an Epson
2200, 13x19 @1440dpi. I am getting an error after the printer
Hi Berry,
I am not a Mac person so some terms may be different there than on PCs.
If I am reading it correctly, the computer has 320 MB of RAM of which
180MB is free or unused when you go to print.
You are unable to print a 17.6 MB image at 13x19 on your Epson 2200. I
am assuming when you
Bernie and others,
I just printed an Olympus E1 test image* that was 2560x1920 pixels on my
Epson 2200 printer at print size 12.5 x 16.67 (4/3 aspect ratio original
image, remember) on 13x19 watercolor paper. At that size, the image is at
154 ppi. I thought that wouldn't be so great, but you
On 6/30/04 7:35 AM, Clark Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Digital cameras are much like computers. If you wait to buy the best one,
you'll never get one!
What I did was get a couple of Nikon coolpixes (950 and 990) on eBay for my
wife and myself. They are old enough to be quite affordable,
Berry,
I've gotten reasonable quality prints from my Minolta DiMage S414, but
there are a number of quality cameras out there now -- Oly E1, Pentax
*ist (a friend just got one - impressive camera), Nikon D70, Canon's
digital rebel. Check the reviews at dpreview.com or the commentaries
at
I haven't seen significant grain with my 5400, at least scanning fine grain
film. Make sure you're using the grain dissolver.
As for the color, I recommend getting Vuescan for your scanning software
and use it to generate a scanner profile. Vuescan has worked much better
for me than the
There's been very little traffic on the forum lately. I don't think that
there's any particular reason.
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe
Glad to see us back on the road!!
Austin Smith wrote:
There's been very little traffic on the forum lately. I don't think that
there's any particular reason.
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL
Onward march of progress I guess - digital origination has taken over...
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Sharp)
wrote:
I was wondering the same thing the other day. I even re-subscribed
thinking I'd fallen off the list...
--
Jim
bernard comolet wrote:
No more
No more traffic on filmscanners ??
Bernard from Angoulême-France
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message
I was wondering the same thing the other day. I even re-subscribed
thinking I'd fallen off the list...
--
Jim
bernard comolet wrote:
No more traffic on filmscanners ??
Bernard from Angoulême-France
Actually Art, what you say is only true when talking about new dedicated
medium format film scanners. There may be athe possibility of a few older
models available in or around that price range as used or refurb units on
Ebay or elsewhere. Ken should check Ebay as well as some of the larger used
You aren't alone in being unhappy about the loss of the slow films: Zeiss
complains that they can't brag about as much lens resolution any more. If
you are already using a tripod, you could try 645 or 6x7. I'd think that
the
Fuji 100F films in 645 would look at least as good as K25 in 35mm
From: David Lewiston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does Agfa still make RSX (ISO 50)?
I'll have to look into this. Is it virtually grainless, like K25?
I've never used it: it appears in a 2-year old brochure that happens to be
sitting on my desk.
Again, there's a Zeiss article* in which they kvetch
The demise of K-25 is a shame, but I would suggest you consider looking
at the Fuji F line of films. In specific, the Provia 100F is a fairly
neutral film with very fine grain which scans well. It gives you a 2
stop advantage over the K-25, as well and uses standard E-6 processing.
Art
David
on 6/2/04 6:39 PM, David Lewiston at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting ready for another field trip. In the past, I have always used
K25 for subjects with fine detail. Imacon scans have yielded 20x prints
effortlessly.
K25 is no longer manufactured in the U.S. Is it still available in
on 6/2/04 6:39 PM, David Lewiston at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting ready for another field trip. In the past, I have always used
K25 for subjects with fine detail. Imacon scans have yielded 20x prints
effortlessly.
K25 is no longer manufactured in the U.S. Is it still available in
HI, Jawed!
My jaw'd (sorry! ;-) ) hit the keyboard if it weren't attached so firmly to
my face!
I am very impressed with what I saw in that review! I suppose that if I
were going to be REALLY professional, I'd still want a dedicated film
scanner, but evidently, this flatbed competes very
I've just started exploring film scanners. Can anyone recommend a good
one that will handle 35mm 6x6 that is $300?
Will I be happy with a flatbed with a transparency attachment?
Thanks,
Ken
Unsubscribe by
I'm going to enjoy the answers to this one.
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
From: Clark Guy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HI, Jawed!
My jaw'd (sorry! ;-) ) hit the keyboard if it weren't attached so firmly to
my face!
I am very impressed with what I saw in that review! I suppose that if I
were going to be REALLY professional, I'd still want a dedicated film
scanner, but
From: Ken McKaba [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've just started exploring film scanners. Can anyone recommend a good
one that will handle 35mm 6x6 that is $300?
If you need 6x6, spend a bit more money and get the Epson 4870.
http://www5e.biglobe.ne.jp/~longnose/scanner_test.html
Will I be happy
I'm getting ready for another field trip. In the past, I have always used
K25 for subjects with fine detail. Imacon scans have yielded 20x prints
effortlessly.
K25 is no longer manufactured in the U.S. Is it still available in other
countries?
If it isn't, then I'll have to look for another
I have about 4,000 of my father's slides that I want to digitize. These are
just vacation slides, nothing really fancy and I doubt that we would ever
print anything larger than 8 X 10 if that.
With so many images to scan, I can't imagine doing them one at a time, and
so I've been looking at
From: David Lewiston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
K25 is no longer manufactured in the U.S. Is it still available in other
countries?
Not Japan. I'm pretty sure it's ancient history everywhere.
If it isn't, then I'll have to look for another slide emulsion that is also
essentially grainless.
Many thanks for the suggestions.
I'm not sure about 20x enlargements though: I consider 13x seriously
excessive. (Hi, my name is Dave, and I'm a grain sniffer.)
Imacon 5600 dpi scans from K25 make grainless giclée prints at 18 x 24,
from somewhat less than full frame, hence 20X. Necessary for
From: David Lewiston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm not sure about 20x enlargements though: I consider 13x seriously
excessive. (Hi, my name is Dave, and I'm a grain sniffer.)
Imacon 5600 dpi scans from K25 make grainless giclée prints at 18 x 24,
from somewhat less than full frame, hence 20X.
What software are you using? I sometimes get the lengthwise lines using
Vuescan with a Minolta Scan Multi Pro, and the usual remedy of deleting
vuescan.ini clears it.
Colin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of C Stirling
Sent: Friday, 28 May 2004
What software are you using? I sometimes get the lengthwise lines using
Vuescan with a Minolta Scan Multi Pro, and the usual remedy of deleting
vuescan.ini clears it.
I'm using Vuescan from about a year ago. I can't try any experiments at the moment
as the power supply has just died on the
Using a Polaroid SS4000 on a PC with Win 2000 Pro, Polacolor 5.0, and
Silverfast Ai 5.0, I am getting horizontal lines appearing on my scans.
I've been watching this discussion as relativly receantly I have also started getting
these lines on my SS4000. In my case they are in the direction of
I wasn't clear in my prior post. The lines are there in Polacolor 8 and
16 bit scans and in Silverfast 16 bit scans. They are not there at all
in any VueScan scans nor in Silverfast 8 bit scans. Your throughput
theory is interesting but the fact that VueScan 16 bit scans are fine
seems to
Thomas Maugham wrote:
Using a Polaroid SS4000 on a PC with Win 2000 Pro, Polacolor 5.0, and
Silverfast Ai 5.0, I am getting horizontal lines appearing on my scans.
There are about 12 lines evenly spaced. Interestingly, when I use
VueScan the scans are fine. Can anyone PLEASE shed some
Tony Sleep said the following on 5/24/2004 11:27 AM:
Clive Moss wrote:
Does anyone have any experience with the Pacific Image PowerSlide 3600
Slide Scanner?
...
AIUI this is a close relative of the same model Kodak sold for a while as
the RFS3600, without any great success. Manf. for them by
Scott,
Thanks for your input.
My scan lines are running across the frame, i.e. perpendicular to the
scan direction. In addition, they are evenly spaced on the frame. I
don't believe it's the scanner (hardware problem) as they only appear
when doing 16 bit scans. They are not present on 8 bit
Does anyone have any experience with the Pacific Image PowerSlide 3600
Slide Scanner? I found a couple of non committal mentions in Google
Groups, and a couple of negative reports elsewhere. It is attractive
because it provides reasonably priced batch scanning of slides - but
only if it works!
--
Clive Moss wrote:
Does anyone have any experience with the Pacific Image PowerSlide 3600
Slide Scanner? I found a couple of non committal mentions in Google
Groups, and a couple of negative reports elsewhere. It is attractive
because it provides reasonably priced batch scanning of slides -
on 05/14/2004 09:18 AM ?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E5kon_T_S=F8nderland?= said the
following:
Keeping a separate proxy just to accomodate this program
seems a bit backward to me.
Hmm, why have the originals in the archiving software at all?
Thumbnails and meta information should be enough, the rest can be
Using a Polaroid SS4000 on a PC with Win 2000 Pro, Polacolor 5.0, and
Silverfast Ai 5.0, I am getting horizontal lines appearing on my scans.
There are about 12 lines evenly spaced. Interestingly, when I use
VueScan the scans are fine. Can anyone PLEASE shed some light on this?
I never noticed
Hello, can anyone suggest where to start, I need a large scanner, ideally
20x24 but perhaps a bit smaller may work. It definitely needs to be larger
than A3. I can use USB, FW, or SCSI. I have macs. Any ideas? thanks
tom robinson
Goggle large, format, and scanner under Google's Advanced Search
function and stand back. You're talking about real money here, however.
Epson's 11x17 color scanner is almost $4K US. The Google search will return
scanners up to 50 wide.
Thanks everyone for your slide film recommendations.
I think I'll start by trying Astia. A friend with a Nikon 4000ED
(the scanner I'll be using) says this has a wide exposure latitude
and scans well.If I find it too flat then I'll try Provia next,
then Velvia last.
--Bill
--
I have Silverfast 5.0 which came bundled with my Polaroid Sprintscan
SS4000. I never used Silverfast but decided to try it. I installed it
on my PC which has Windows 2000 Pro and it seems to work fine except
that I can't seem to tell it which frame to scan, it defaults to only
the first frame.
At 01:37 PM 3/25/2004 -0600, you wrote:
I'm a bit perplexed at what the dpi means on a film scanner. Trying to
compare apples to apples, will a 4000 dpi Brand X film scanner in theory
produce a better quality image outputted than a 2000 dpi Brand X scanner,
given that the output resolution is the
901 - 1000 of 17967 matches
Mail list logo
