> >What I gather is that a dedicated film scanner with a wet mounted >film is the real choice to have. The Nikons have an optional glass >carrier (at least for MF) that you might be able to wet mount your >film too. Not sure if you could do the same with 35mm or not. > >The printer will not have as much range as the scanner, but you want >everything you can get for image manipulation. Some printers claim >dmax at 2.x on glossy, and better than 1.6 on matte, so 4.x should be >a whole world more. > > > Thanks for the info. Not that I'd buy one, but it seems that a decent flat bed may actually suffice for the most part.. Peace Roy .
Message
Re: [Digital BW] wet mount scanning - what's "better".. printers or scanners?
2005-05-10 by Roy