Digital BW, The Print

Hi Tom;

Have to say that after I got my 8000, I was a bit disappointed in the
results on certain negatives but I had read on-line reviews that made it
seem as though the 'stretching' feature of the glassless carrier worked
pretty well. In my experience it was very hit or miss due to the inherent
flatness of the particular film that was loaded. I started to hate the fact
that some films could not be focused sharply across the image.

So far I am very happy with the glass carrier. I started out thinking I
would buy the 869G and save $100 because I did not think I would use the
rotated feature. I called Nikon and a tech rep indicated that besides
rotation some people find the 869GR easier to use. I have often made the
mistake of trying to 'save money' and it almost never works out -- so I
bought the rotated carrier. Well I am using the rotated feature (because in
a comparison I could see the difference between a file rotated in PS and
rotated in the carrier, even at max resolution and 16 bit the carrier
rotation produced a visibly sharper image.)

The glass looks to be anti-newton on the top (slight appearance of texture
when viewed at an angle and I have not had any Newton Rings.

The rotated carrier only handles film to 6x9, if you have 6x12 you would
have to get the 869G.

Wendel



On 6/1/02 2:17 PM, "pleistocenehome" <tandrews@...> wrote:

> Hi Wendel,
> 
> I assume your improvement comes in better focusing by holding
> the MF film flat in the glass carrier, is that right?  I also have a
> Nikon 8000 and find that getting the film relatively flat in the
> standard carrier is really fussy and not always successful.  I have
> even selected softer focus parts of the scan and applied extra
> USM to match the rest of the image in a few cases or rescanned.
> Does the glass carrier have any problems such as slight
> degradation of sharpness, newton rings or other artifacts?
> Would there be any difference between B&W negs and color
> transparencies in this regard?   And do you know what the
> difference is between the regular glass-covered holder versus
> the glass-covered rotating holder?   I would be interested to
> know what experience others have had with glass carriers and
> other methods to get good scanner focusing.  Many thanks!
> 
> Tom Andrews
> www.wildlandart.com
> 
> 
>> This is very good advice. I have the Epson 2450 and a Nikon
> 8000. I got the
>> Epson for scanning 4"x5" and larger but I have also tried it out
> on my 6x7cm
>> negs and the results are quite good. The Nikon is definitely
> better but it
>> is hard to say that it is $2500 better. I happy with the Nikon but
> only
>> after I invested an extra 350.00 in a rotated glass carrier. For
> medium
>> format the glass carrier is an absolute necessity. I wish I had
> know that
>> before wasting time on scans with the non-glass carrier.
>> 
>> Wendel
>> 
>> On 5/31/02 5:44 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@e...>
> wrote:
>> 
>>> Don,
>>> 
>>> The dedicated film medium format film scanners will give
> you some impressive
>>> results. It really comes down to $$$ vs. quality as usual.
>>> 
>>> If money is tight, people have been reporting very good things
> on this list
>>> and elsewhere about the Epson 2450 which will scan
> negatives up to 4"x9".
>>> This seems to be equaling or bettering flatbeds in the
> $1,000 to $1,500
>>> range.
>> ------------snipped-------------
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>