Digital BW, The Print

Thanks Paul. I've been sitting on the fence about the 
glass carrier. There aren't any stores locally that 
stock either one so it was  good to get your feedback.
Peter
> I have glass carrier FH-869G.  It is one big window that allows me to put
> the negatives where ever I want.  So, I've marked the 6x6 dividing
> line/frame spacing for the first 2 frames, and I put my 645 2-frame strip so
> that the frame space coincides with the mark.  I then tell the scanner I
> have 6x6 in it.
> 
> It does allow full frame views.
> 
> With silver film, no masks are needed.  For color film, to avoid rings on
> the bottom (non-anti-newton-ring glass) there are loose masks that hold the
> film off the glass.  (The top glass is anti-newton-ring.)
> 
> Paul
> _____________________
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plindman@... [mailto:plindman@...]
> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 7:47 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Renamed: MF Film Scanners
> 
> 
> Paul,
> 
> Which MF glass carrier do you have for the
> 8000\ufffdthe one for strip film or the one for single
> frame? Does it allow a greater scan area--can you
> get the frame edges on both sides--than the
> glassless strip carrier?
> Thanks
> Peter Lindman
> > > > 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.
> >
> > >The only thing they say is the computer had 512 MB of RAM.
> >
> > >My Win 2000 PC has 384 MB RAM and I don't get times
> > >anywhere near 2 hours on my Polaroid SprintScan 120....
> >
> > >They do say that using ICE, ROC, and GEM will increase time
> > >"significantly."
> >
> > Note that the Minolta with medium format film has an optical resolution of
> > 3200 x 4800 dpi.  (The Nikon 8000 does 4K x 4K dpi with MF film.)
> >
> > I have the Nikon 8000, and I agree that GEM slows it down very
> considerably,
> > but not to 2 hours.  I have 512 MB RAM on a Win 98, and I notice the hard
> > disk is being accessed continuously with these big, slow GEM scans.  I
> have
> > not been able to tell how much RAM would handle a MF scan with the special
> > programs running, but I'd guess 1 GB would not be overkill.  (Of course my
> > W98 machine is limited to 512, so I just take a break while it's doing its
> > scanning.)
> >
> > I have found that, contrary to some reviewers' comments, GEM does work
> fine
> > with normal B&W, silver-based film.  I don't bother with ICE.
> >
> > I also found the glass carrier to be necessary.
> >
> > When I scan a B&W negative, I call it a monochrome positive, which gives
> > ample latitude to use the histogram in the preview for setting white and
> > black points.  (The monochrome negative setting will clip one of the
> ends.)
> >
> > Paul
> > http://www.PaulRoark.com
> >

>