PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:53 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: real value?
Ian,
Partial possible answers to your question are:
I wonder why there are so few people film scanning then printing with dye
sublimation printers?
(1) Dye sublimation printers
ot; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Jackson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: (1) BW - I see no mention of this is any Dye sub printer literature
: (2) Where do I find an A3 D
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ian Jackson
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Laurie,
Re point (2) The Olympus P400 also laminates
(3) Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other
n A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Ian,
I totally agree. HP has fallen victim to
Actually, I like the fact that inkjets are somewhat worse and better
than inkjets but not that inkjets might be equal to inkjets.
Some inkjets are more equal than others. Apologies to Orwell and the list.
"At the extremely high end, the KAF-16801CE CCD features 16.6 million
pixels
in a 40804080-pixel array. By using relatively large, 99-m pixels, the
device delivers greater light-capturing ability, dynamic range, and SNR
than
possible with the commonly used smaller pixels. As a result of the
of this is any Dye sub printer literature
(2) Where do I find an A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Ian,
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Jackson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: (1) BW - I see no mention of this is any Dye sub printer literature
: (2) Where do I find an A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
.
Try looking for a used one !!!
Repro-Link is a trade mag with
I use my D30 on Super-Fine JPEG mostly, and the 1G Microdrive can hold
about 799 of those.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(B.Rumary) wrote:
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Berry Ives wrote:
Digital SLRs that have maybe half the required resolution now cost
about
$3K.
If
]'
Subject: RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
I don't think the image sensor is the problem.
I'm talking about a die that is the same size as the current one used
in the
Canon D30, namely 22.7mm horizontal only made with pixels the size
currently
used
- Original Message -
From: Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:01 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Michael,
I've got to be careful here as this is a scanners BBS not a printer BBS
but
I wonder why there are so few people
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
Until CMOS sensors became high-quality, the image sensor market was held
back by the specialist nature of the CCD manufacturing process. You can't
produce a CCD in a CMOS fab line and vice versa, and CCD fab
At 11:53 AM 02-02-01, Laurie Solomon wrote:
(3) Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other features
come very close to those, if not in some instances surpass those, of
inkjets.
??
Am I reading this wrong, it doesn't make sense to me.
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Ian,
I totally agree. HP has fallen victim to the same short term marketing
mentality
that infects too many of t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:53 AM 02-02-01, Laurie Solomon wrote:
(3) Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other
features
come very close to those, if not in some instances surpass those, of
inkjets.
?? Am I reading this wrong, it doesn't make sense to me.
I
I buy a lot of items secondhand, including a lot of technology which I
have saved tons of money doing. I would be very cautious about
considering buying a dye sub printer used, unless it came with a very
good service contract. They are finicky and very expensive to repair,
and they are heavy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:53 AM 02-02-01, Laurie Solomon wrote:
(3) Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other features
come very close to those, if not in some instances surpass those, of
inkjets.
??
Am I reading this wrong, it doesn't make sense to me.
orifice. :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 6:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 11:53 AM 02-02-01, Laurie Solomon wrote:
(3
You are right on both accounts. As written it makes no sense at all; but a
relatively non acrobatic leap to the assumption you suggest would be in
order.
At 11:53 AM 02-02-01, Laurie Solomon wrote:
(3) Inkjets have reached the level where there quality and other
features
come very
no mention of this is any Dye sub printer literature
(2) Where do I find an A3 Dye sub printer under 2000 UK Pounds?
Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Moore" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: film
Laurie Solomon wrote:
Ian,
Partial possible answers to your question are:
I wonder why there are so few people film scanning then printing with dye
sublimation printers?
(1) Dye sublimation printers may be too costly as compared to inkjet
printers both to purchase and to operate
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Laurie Solomon wrote:
Ian,
Partial possible answers to your question are:
I wonder why there are so few people film scanning then printing with dye
sublimation printers?
(1) Dye sublimation printers may be too costly as compared to inkjet
Laurie I believe you are missing my point an analogy would be a vintage
car.
if it runs when you start it and it does not need new parts it will
still get you from A to B in the same way as it did when it was new.
So it is with computers and their peripherals ,Its only when you change
Operating
]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: real value? paperless office
Fact is anyone who sends me an mega important doc will always have a copy
themselves if we ever need it.
How can you count on this if we were actually in a "paperless society" or if
the other person was or was in a "p
Michael Moore wrote:
I cut my electronics teeth on HP when I trained as an electronics tech in Th
US Navy... Their stuff was always built to last... Last summer I bought an HP
932C... it's built much better than my Epson 740... plus the cartridges come
with the nozzles built in so if a
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Wilkinson
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Laurie I believe you are missing my point an analogy would be a vintage
car.
if it runs when you start
Art,
You have hit the nail on the head and even with Michael Wilkinson's hammer.
:-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value
not disagree?
Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Michael Moore wrote:
I cut my electronics teeth on HP when I trained as an electronics tech
Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Michael Moore wrote:
I cut my electronics teeth on HP when I trained as an electronics tech
in Th
US Navy... T
I have to admit to an ignorance on compressing files in gereral
I use LZW when Im storing on my server and have not bothered with other
methods simply because in my early digital days I was shown how badly
jpeg images are degraded .
I understand that JPEG 2000 is the new standard and should be
clogged
or dried up though, even when we've been away for two months. Res is awful,
longevity worse, color a nightmare.
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Laurie Solomon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: real value?
Date: Tue, Jan 30, 2001, 7:54 PM
(1) Wil
]]On Behalf Of Hart or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 3:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Michael:
Thanks for your excellent advice (and the opportunity to post this message).
..SNIP
all one's planning for nil in 2 or three years - let alone
10
: years.
:
: -Original Message-
: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael
Wilkinson
: Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:09 AM
: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Art ,we all have our own approach to acquiring those items we want,your
way is a good way foreword,but don't misinterpret what I was endorsing.
When I purchased my current Flatbed scanner in 1995 (its 7th birthday is
around the corner)
You obviously did a great deal of research and
ubject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Date: Tue, Jan 30, 2001, 4:42 AM
35mm film will go the way of the do-do, just as movies theaters did when
television started showing films, and later when videotaped movies came
out. I haven't seen a movie theater in decades, have you?
However, in fai
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
35mm film will go the way of the do-do, just as movies theaters did when
television started
Michael Wilkinson wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Clark Guy" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
: professional photography, there will be specialized digital camera
backs
: that can do perhaps as much as 25Mpixels or better using scanning
: technologies. ~~~
I would suggest (a) that your office is a rarity,
I suppose it is.
(b) your office
technically is not a "paperless office" in that you still receive invoices,
receipts, etc. from others that you need to scan in, and
er... obviously, but we then scan it and bin it.
All contractors invoice
Hersch wrote:
Wouldn't it make sense, if going away for an extended period, to remove
the
cartridge? Or am I missing something here?
Removing the cart won't flush the heads. You have to use a cleaning cart to
flush the heads, or the ink still in the lines and head itself could dry and
block
: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 5:28 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
I don't think the image sensor is the problem.
I'm talking about a die that is the same size as the current one used in the
Canon D30, namely 22.7mm horizontal only made
Clark,
I can honestly say that my scan back,still subjects only, produces far
superior digital images to those made from trannies on either my
flatbed or my drum scanner.
1. There is NO noise anywhere , either in deep shadow or highlights.
2.The capture software is essentiality scanning software
: Berry Ives [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
on 1/30/01 2:32 PM, Clark Guy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Michael!
Uhh... 35Mb file at 24bits per pixel corresponds
I cut my electronics teeth on HP when I trained as an electronics tech in Th
US Navy... Their stuff was always built to last... Last summer I bought an HP
932C... it's built much better than my Epson 740... plus the cartridges come
with the nozzles built in so if a print head clogs, you just
The Canon D30 is NOT a CCD array camera.
It has a CMOS chip.
If I used the CCD relating to the D30, I know better, and it was an
oversight. Sorry, you are right, it is a CMOS sensor array. Though, that is
not relevant to the points I was making... I guess I call any light sensor
array a CCD
Michael
Out of interest, how much did the digital back cost?
--
Regards
Richard
//
| @ @ --- Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C _) )
--- '
__ /
ratio in yesterday's posts, so I am suitably chastised! (good thing I'm not
designing bridges!!!)
Guy Clark
-Original Message-
From: Michael Wilkinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Future of Photography (was RE: film
]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 3:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
I thought the sarcasm in my original comment was so dripping that the
emoicons would have been redundant, I'm not sure, however...
Yes, multiplexes are movie theaters. We
printers, do not try and reinstall
them later. Use a new fresh set of cartridges.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hart or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 12:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Cost of these backs? Cost to store images?
: Space taken up with storage media?, etc
###
4500 buys you a Lightphase studio kit comprising scan back,2 lowerpro
lights and an IR filter.
or printer even if it still worked and could be used with your more
current system.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Wilkinson
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 3:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value
ED]]On Behalf Of Richard
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value? paperless office
I would suggest (a) that your office is a rarity,
I suppose it is.
(b) your office
technically is not a "paperless office" in that you still rece
At 21:36 29/01/2001 -0600, you wrote:
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
Maris
exactly. you can still buy a brand new Nikon FM2, which is in production
for around 20 years now. My Canon camera of the same vintage is still doing
well. My flatbed is OK, so many
me post this and thanks to you all in advance for your great
comments and suggestions!
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Michael Wilkinson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001, 1:21 PM
Laurie Soloman ,suggests buying &qu
Its interesting to look at what the photographic industry is
experimenting with.
Mini Labs can now install a printer than scans the neg ,adjusts the
contrast levels ,colour corrects and then prints using LEDs or Laser
beams and then processes conventionally.
As I understand it the number of
IronWorks wrote:
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
Maris
Try 20 years ago... ;-(
Art
35mm film will go the way of the do-do, just as movies theaters did when
television started showing films, and later when videotaped movies came
out. I haven't seen a movie theater in decades, have you?
However, in fairness, 8mm movie film has become a rarity since video
camcorders. What
I have rarely found buying top of the line works out as "good value" in
most peripherals. Look at things like dot matrix printers. I bought a
top end one which cost a minor fortune. Sure it still could work if I
used it, it was designed to last. Too bad it was superseded for most
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 7:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
35mm film will go the way of the do-do, just as movies theaters did when
television started showing films, and later when videotaped movies came
out. I
; and in this area, they all show 35mm movies to
boot.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
35mm film will go the way of the do-do
into the future are very risky and daring.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Berry Ives
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 8:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
on 1/29/01 2:21 PM, Michael Wilkinson at [EMAIL PROTECTED
]]On Behalf Of Michael Wilkinson
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Its interesting to look at what the photographic industry is
experimenting with.
Mini Labs can now install a printer than scans the neg ,adjusts the
contrast levels ,colour
y, January 30, 2001 4:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value? paperless office
From: "IronWorks" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
I've been working in the computer industry for 20 years and I'm a
Well... Perhaps that's what was meant after all?
Laurie Solomon wrote:
Gee, there are a number of 10-18 screen multiplexes where I live; do they
count as movie theaters?
snip...
.
--Bob
-Original Message-
From: Clark Guy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 11:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
HI, everyone!
I guess I'll weigh in with my opinion on the future
Clark Guy writes ...
I believe that digital cameras will continue to get better
and better, but ...
...
because we are already approaching the limit of how small a
single pixel can be. It can't be smaller than a wavelength
of light, and we are approaching this limit even now. ...
Laurie,
Your post outlining your extensive processing experience left me somewhat
embarrassed at my lazy attitude to working in the darkroom.Well, many
of us amateurs go through the experience of hearing, "get that mess
cleared up!".
I have all the "right" equipment, 120 film, Beselar,
- Original Message -
From: "Clark Guy" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For
: professional photography, there will be specialized digital camera
backs
: that can do perhaps as much as 25Mpixels or better using scanning
: technologies. ~~~
- Original Message -
From: "Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:
: I now buy those $100 (or less) flatbeds, and replace them as the newer
: models come out with higher resolution, more speed, or other features.
: I'm sorry but you can't make even a "good quality 300 dpi" scanner
into
: a
Given Moore's Law
I'd like to give my rant on this... It is NOT a law damn it! It is an
assertion. One that MANY people in the industry made before, and about the
same time Moore did. He did not come up with this. It is like saying Bill
Gates invented software.
Sorry ;-)
Clark Guy writes ...
I believe that digital cameras will continue to get better
and better, but ...
...
because we are already approaching the limit of how small a
single pixel can be. It can't be smaller than a wavelength
of light, and we are approaching this limit even now. ...
ECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Date: Mon, Jan 29, 2001, 8:21 PM
From: "IronWorks" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
I've been working in the computer industry for 20 years and I'm afraid you
are wrong
o: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
I'm not too sure about the pixel and array size statement. The CCD's in
current 3.3Mpixel CCD cameras like the Olympus 3030 have a diagonal
dimension about a third that of the Canon D30 SLR digicam's sensor.
ision quit making film
cameras...
Mike Moore
Hart or Mary Jo Corbett wrote:
There are a great many movie theaters in the SF Bay Area, and not all are
multiplexes, either.
Hart Corbett
--
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners:
easy to get less wires out of a larger package.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Murphy, Bob H
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:28 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Future of Photography (was RE: filmscanners: real value?)
I
: filmscanners: real value?
Gee, there are a number of 10-18 screen multiplexes where I live; do they
count as movie theaters? I have actually gone to see movies in them also;
but there are many people in my university town who got to see movies in
these multiplexes every week and throughout
on 1/30/01 2:32 PM, Clark Guy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, Michael!
Uhh... 35Mb file at 24bits per pixel corresponds to what... 1.45 million
pixels. That's just 8 bit color.
Haven't you confused bits with bytes? 24 bits is 3 bytes. 35 MB--not 35
Mb--would give you 35 MB/3B = 11+
be minimized by flushing the ink out
of the printer.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hart or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 3:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
Michael:
Thanks for your
Laurie Soloman ,suggests buying "two steps behind" technology.
Good advice
To refine that however you seem to be talking about relatively
inexpensive kit .
A scanner costing less than 1000 dollars/600UK pounds is a consumer
item.
The manufacturers expect you to throw it away fairly soon or give
on 1/29/01 2:21 PM, Michael Wilkinson at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
If you really want good value for money allied to something which will
last a decade you have to look at what you want from the product.
buy it at the right price and you are set for
the next Decade
Make no mistake about
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Berry Ives" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
| on 1/29/01 2:21 PM, Michael Wilkinson
are very risky and daring.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Berry Ives
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 8:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: real value?
on 1/29/01 2:21 PM, Michael Wilkinson at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
From: "IronWorks" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And we now have the paperless office that was predicted 5 years ago.
I've been working in the computer industry for 20 years and I'm afraid you
are wrong. The paperless office was predicted more like 15 years ago. :-)
do think that any sort of ten year projections or
forecasts into the future are very risky and daring.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Berry Ives
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 8:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners
83 matches
Mail list logo
