Digital BW, The Print

Minolta quotes the following specs for the Scan Multi Pro:
"35mm film: Max. 4800 x 4800 dpi
Medium format film (120/220): Max. 3200 x 4800* dpi
* Max. 4800 x 4800 dpi by interpolation"

Also curious about Pop Photo's 02:14:00 (16bit color) scan time. To me,
their testing is usually pretty specific, but they still seem to be learning
on the digital end. For instance, is this using interpolated 4800 res, or
max optical? Firewire or Ultra SCSI? Standalone mode or PS Plugin? They seem
to imply that this doesn't reflect enabling multisampling mode, but don't
specify if they disabled Digital ICE, which at least on my Nikon is enabled
by default and can almost double overall start-scan-to-file-save times (and
can't be used on B&W film anyway). I mean, Minolta quotes 230-250 *SECONDS*
for 6x9 (ICE3 off). Even allowing for the what might charitably be referred
to as "optimistic" numbers scanner/printer manufacturers like to brag about,
we're talking a 3300% increase here! Geez, hopefully high-bit grayscale will
at least only take 1/3 the time...whatever that time actually is.

In any case, glad to see that someone is at least taking another step
towards freeing us from drum scanner-related bankruptcy.

Doug


> Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 17:38:36 -0500
> From: J Greer <jgpinfo@...>
> Subject: Renamed: MF Film Scanners
> 
> Just read a review of the Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO in Pop. Photo.
> (June issue) and they said a 6x7 scan at 48-bit color (and I assume the
> full 4800 dpi resolution) took 2 hours, 14 minutes. I almost have to think
> this is a mistake. Definitely something to think about.
> 
> Jeff Greer
> 
> At 03:52 PM 05/10/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>> Please report how you like the Howtek after you play with it awhile.
>> Since it's 4000 ppi, I'd like to know just how much better it is than a
>> Polaroid SS120, Minolta Pro, or Imacon Photo.
>> 
>> Lloyd