Digital BW, The Print

If you are living with soft scans and not seeing the quality difference
between a 2450 and 3200 then you must have a defective unit.  Here are two
urls, the first a scan of a 6X6 Velvia transparency and the second a scan of
a Portra 160VC negative, both done on an Epson 3200:

http://www.sclamb.com/scancomp/Church.jpg

http://www.sclamb.com/scancomp/Glen%20Portra.jpg

I test printed both of these to 20²X20² and they are sharp.

Simon

On 10/3/03 8:15 pm, "gaberegalbuto" <gaberegalbuto@...> wrote:

> I have a 2450 with which I have been mostly dissapointed.  The underside of
> the glass cannot be cleaned, except by a service station.  I have done this
> twice, trying to explain the necessity of clean glass to the tech, but he is
> not a photographer.  The haze builds up again anyhow.  Even with clean glass,
> results are less than very good.
> 
> This is basically the same scanner as the 3200.  I have heard the optics are
> identical, and I've seen back to back scans which show --NO improvement-- in
> quality between the two, just bigger file sizes.  The 3200 scans much faster,
> however.
> 
> Of course, at roughly $2500 less than the Nikon, I'm living with soft scans.
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]