on 10/2/01 4:30 PM, Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excellent objective review:
http://www.creativepro.com/printerfriendly/story/14539.html
It's like most reviews, the critical tone is overly neutral so as not to
offend purveyors, and so doesn't properly
Wire, I like your review better than Bruce's!!! And I haven't even read Bruce's!
I guess I'm a born skeptic and have never completely trusted any review in any publication that accepts advertising for the products being reviewed. There's too much conflict of interest.
In a message dated
I've read both his comments and Wire Moores, and the truth is somewhere in
between. his are written for a major magazine readership, yours, if you will
excuse me, seem quite hostile to the 4000.
Bruce says If ICE is cool, GEM
is nothing short of amazing. Blah, blah. What he doesn't say is that
As for the color profile being out of wack, now *that* is a major issue in
my opinion. I have just discovered how much better profiled Vuescan's
results are than Nikonscans for Nikon scanners. (though there is an annoying
VS bug with the 8000 that I've reported to Ed) Nikon seems to have pumped
At 03:32 03-10-01 -0400, you wrote:
Wire, I like your review better than Bruce's!!! And I haven't even read
Bruce's!
I guess I'm a born skeptic and have never completely trusted any review in
any publication that accepts advertising for the products being
reviewed. There's too much
No! Not any more so than anyone else in the industry. I read a quick post
claiming that the review was good and *objective*. I read it and thought:
this is the same sort of pay-the-bills purveyor-centered review that
typifies the industry reviewing of *everything* from cars to hi-fis, to
sporting
I'm not at all hostile to the 4000 ED. It's just a piece of gear.
I used a LS-2000 for a few years and found it to be very effective. I'm sure
the 4000 ED is an improvement. Bruce likes it; I think... ? I couldn't tell
from his review!
My intention was primarily to challenge someone else's
Wire - I enjoyed your review of a review - some meaty kiblets for
thought. I too become totally frustrated by reviewers who play it safe to
the extent that you can't tell whether it is a good bit of gear or bad. I
think more often it is because they are not sure enough of their own ground
In a message dated 10/3/2001 11:15:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 03:32 03-10-01 -0400, you wrote:
Wire, I like your review better than Bruce's!!! And I haven't even read
Bruce's!
I guess I'm a born skeptic and have never completely trusted any review in
any
