Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., 
"James E. Martz" wrote . . . 
> I'd like to stay under $1,000.  And I'd like to be able to scan 
> some BW negatives (3" x 4") of my and my brother's and sister's 
> weddings of about 50 yrs ago, but I can't justify a huge            
> expenditure for about 150 negatives.

Dear James,
Look at Wire Moore's review in the Scan Group:
>>
From:  Wire Moore <wirem@h...>
Date:  Wed Aug 15, 2001  4:33 am
Subject:  HP Scanjet 7400C output compared with Nikon LS-2000

For anyone interested, I've prepared a report of the output of the HP 
7400C as compared with the LS-2000.

Note that a variety of examples images will make this a slow page to 
load for dialup users (about 800K bytes).

http://members.home.net/wirem/Imaging/NikonLS2000vsHP7400C/index.html

Wire
>>

I was very surprised at how well the HP 7400C did on 35mm and one 
would guess that results on 3"x4"BW negatives might be equally 
surprising for a $500 scanner.  I love my Polaroid SS4000 with 
TechPan 35mm BW and am wondering and hoping that the HP 7400C might 
handle my BW 120 size . . . particularly if it would allow scanning
in "proof sheets" of 12 frames at a time . . . I do not think this is 
what HP had in mind, but it's what I HAVE in mind.  Even 4 frames 
ought to be possible straight out with the transparency adapter at 
5"x5".  Moreover, you might find the 35mm results acceptable for the 
present.  I realize this is probably OT but BW digital scans 
certainly underlie BW digital prints.

Bill Reeves
wjreeves@...