, March 10, 2002 8:02 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Hi David,
That prompts the question, how does the Imacon compare to the Polaroid
SS120? Bearing in mind that there is still a significant price difference
and that you are allowed
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 17:35:31 +1100 geoff murray
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Is Ice in the future of the SS120?
No, since scanners which don't have an IR channel cannot support ICE.
However Polaroid have an interesting standalone dust removal prog in beta
which works very well to locally
On Sun, 10 Mar 2002 22:48:23 -0500 Hemingway, David J
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The SS120 compares favorably with the Precision II.
SS120 = ~2,200GBP
Imacon Photo = 4,000GBP
Citroen Saxo 1.4 = 6,000GBP
Imacon Precision II = 10,000GBP
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip
Now, given the recent price reductions, for another £1,000 more than the
competition, I can't see any reason to consider any other scanner over the
Flextight. I am always open to contrary views though, and if anyone can
I would like to see the Minolta Multi Pro's 4800ppi and claimed high
dynamic
range compared with the Imacon Flextight II or is it now III?
Preben
I have the Minolta, and would be happy to participate in such a comparison.
But does not the price difference make comparison moot? And who will
Now, given the recent price reductions, for another £1,000 more than the
competition, I can't see any reason to consider any other scanner over the
Flextight. I am always open to contrary views though, and if anyone can
provide good reasons not to go the Flextight route (barring saving the
Moreno Polloni wrote:
Now, given the recent price reductions, for another £1,000 more than the
competition, I can't see any reason to consider any other scanner over
the
Flextight. I am always open to contrary views though, and if anyone can
provide good reasons not to go the Flextight
scanners beyond the disadvantageous
price/performance ratios.
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:20 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Dave
I accept that the software can assist
Good points you raise. I always get my 35mm slides unmounted and I mount
the ones that I wish to file, so that is not problem. The panoramas would
not be a problem either as I don't really do any. As for film base, there
are about fifty profiles for various film types in the scanning
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I accept that the software can assist in pulling more information out of
a
negative
Simon
Boy, do I disagree with that... How on earth can software pull more
information out of a negative, aside from the control of the light source
and the analog gain
Austin Franklin wrote:
Personally, I wouldn't give too much weight to film profile availability...once you
get
the hang of setting black and white points, and curves, you'll probably forget all
about
them.
Could you say more on this subject, please, for a newcomer who is just beginning to
Preben wrote:
---
I have been very happy with Polaroid's SS4000 - scanned 11.000 slides so
far - but there are, fairly frequently, moments where a polarized, dark blue
sky on a Velvia comes out a mess - and I wish for an Imacon, somehow hoping
that it could solve the problem. I tried
Dave King wrote:
SNIP:
I will disagree with your assessment of the LS-30 and Vuescan after owning
that scanner for a few years. With color negs particularly Vuescan blows
away what you can get with concurrent versions of NikonScan in terms of
tone
scale accuracy (in the shadows
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 8:35 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Hi Dave,
Calibration settings is the wrong term. What I meant is the software
interface leads one
- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:39 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
David Lewiston wrote:
Simon
To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
Just did
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 11:08:16 -
Simon!
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in the mailing
list you found what I have
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
the mailing
list you found what I have been written about film flatness problems . I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of them could match the Imacon
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 10:17:14 -0500
Imacon has a build in USM equal to about 60%.. radius 1+ tresh. 1 in
the sofware
Even if I try
Austin Franklin wrote:
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
the mailing
list you found what I have been written about film flatness problems .
I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and
Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
the mailing
list you found what I have been written about film flatness problems . I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of them could match the Imacon
: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:08 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
That is not so Dave. Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps greatly. Shadow detail
the
qualities of editing raw files with the convenience of CM and good film
terms
Dave
- Original Message -
From: Mikael Risedal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 9:35 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
From: Simon Lamb
Austin Franklin wrote:
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
the mailing
list you found what I have been written about film flatness
problems .
I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and
Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
Vuescans advantages over most software (haven't used Flextight's, but
hear
it's superb) has to do with the fact you can bring a scan into photoshop
somewhere between raw and final, enabling difficult shadow transition edits
that are far superior to most other software I've tried. It combines
PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:08 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
That is not so Dave. Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it
is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps
Austin Franklin wrote:
Austin
All sharpening was off, we double checked it to ensure an even test. We
also turned it on to see the difference and, to be honest, the
Flextight was
as sharp with sharpening turned off as the other two were with it
turned on.
Turning sharpening on
Although I agree that hardware sharpening, or even non-disclosed
software sharpening, is problematic in testing for non-sharpened images
in analyzing sharpness, I question the value of looking at a
non-sharpened image in terms of determining which scanner has higher
resolution, unless there is an
Although I agree that hardware sharpening, or even non-disclosed
software sharpening, is problematic in testing for non-sharpened images
in analyzing sharpness, I question the value of looking at a
non-sharpened image in terms of determining which scanner has higher
resolution,
Hi Art,
We
Simon,
I accept that the software can assist in pulling more information out of a
negative
Boy, do I disagree with that... How on earth can software pull more
information out of a negative, aside from the control of the light source
and the analog gain stage prior to the A/D? Those aren't
29 matches
Mail list logo
