Digital BW, The Print

I've been using the Plustek for several years now and it does a very
good job. Good enough, in fact, to exhibit just how disappointing some
of my 35mm from the past is, technically speaking. 7200 dpi puts a
very pitiless spotlight on any deficits. One of the very early
reviewers, who was published in a UK photo magazine, really trashed
the machine as being inadequate for use because at 7200dpi all his
output looked less than sharp whereas 4000dpi from it as well as from
another brand looked good. My experience with it indicates that he
hadn't a clue as to what he was seeing. At that time it was even more
affordable than today so a review such as his may very well have
curtailed the machines marketing considerably.

Regards
Duane





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> Richard wrote:
> 
> > Are there any good scanners for 35mm negatives 
> > or should as, what is the best for 35mm ?
> 
> David Brooks at Shutterbug tests a lot of these and is very enthused by 
> the affordable Plustek 7200i.
> 
> My experience is that the typical 4000 dpi of a film scanner cannot 
> capture all the detail that is in the film.  So, those extra pixels 
> just might be significant.
> 
> 
> > or is all photography pretty much gone to digital.
> 
> So far, I see no (affordable) serious digital competition for my medium 
> format Tech Pan film when ultimate B&W quality is the issue.  For 
> color, however, I never shoot film any more.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>