That's great. Thanks for the good news Tony.
Sam
Sam A. McCandless wrote:
in case the list is gone when I get back.
It won't be gone. I've seen enough confirmation here and off-list that it's
still serving a useful function, to put the safety-catch back on g
Regards
Tony Sleep - http
[snip]
I can now see no way to rescue this list from terminal decline except
moderated posting, or at least zero-tolerance moderation. I simply don't
have the time or energy for either, even if I did want to play policeman,
which I don't.
It's been tedious lately, but I think it's worth keeping.
Thanks, Bruce. I'm running out of Supra 400 and wondering whether to
replace it with Superia 400 or HD. And soon I'll have to replace
Supra 100 too.
Sam
I just shot a bunch of snapshots with this new consumer 400 speed film.
I just wanted to pass along a note that it gives wonderful scans (on
Thanks for this site Erik. I'm not sure what to make of these no-name
reviews. Can you tell us who's behind the site and where they're
coming from?
It's less important, but I was disappointed in the Polaroid review
because it's now so dated. Maybe they all are.
Sam
Hi!
This site has a lot of
Pat Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
I'll go this one better. I don't open attachments even
from most people I *do* know, without first saving and
scanning for virii. I have never been infected with
any kind of virus, in 20+ years using computers.
reinforcing Tony Sleep's and Norm Unsworth's
If anyone else is on the scan@leben list... are you having problems?
All my messages to it bounced yesterday and I got no mail from it today.
Code red strikes?
Art
I had a similar problem with an epson-inkjet list message, so I'm
afraid its somehow related to Mitchell Leben's server(s).
My use will be to scan for archive, and for high resolution
prints (Epson 1270 up to A3), of some valuable older Kodachrome (a
few Ectachrome) slides. I'll also be scanning new slides and
negatives. Most are in good shape (fairly clean, a few dust spots
but seldom scratches); I use
I'm trying to decide between these two scanners. They both claim 16-bit
output, however the Polaroid scans in 12 bit and outputs in 16; and the
Nikon scans in 14 bit (I think) and outputs in 16. Are both of these
options as good as true 16 bit scanning?
Any input would be so appreciated, since
. The kodak film was the warehouse bulk
pack, I think it is called Max.
From: Sam A. McCandless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film for scanning with FS 2710
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 06:44:24 -0700
I am planning on taking pictures
This is just a note of thanks to all those who helped me answer, in
the negative, the question of whether scanners need to be level. From
the responses both on this list and on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, it
seems to be a non-issue.
Sam
I've added a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 to my desktop (w/o trying to
level it 8). And installed both Polaroid's PolaColor Insight Pro
(4.5) software and LaserSoft Imaging's Silverfast 5 software. Both
were bundled. Silverfast 5 includes an IT-8 calibration module, which
includes profiling. A
I'm adding a Polaroid Sprint Scan 4000 to my already crowded desktop,
and it does not seem (I don't have a level) to sit precisely level in
either of the two places I had hoped to put it. That worries me
because I think I remember reading somewhere that it's important that
a scanner sit
At 12:02 PM -0500 12/20/99, Hemingway, David J wrote:
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:02:20 -0500
From: Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Assistance with Polaroid products
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL
13 matches
Mail list logo
