I picked up 4 rolls of 35mm color film at WPPI in Las Vegas from Kodak that is meant for improved scans. I have yet to try it. That is a moving forward answer for sure but it does mean that the film companies are not entirely closed to scanning issue. Eric Eric Neilsen Photo 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9 Dallas, TX 75226 214 827-8301 http://ericneilsenphotography.com SKype ejprinter _____ From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 5:40 AM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanner or not On 03/04/2008 Richard wrote: > Are there any good scanners for 35mm negatives > or should as, what is the best for 35mm ? Nikon seem to be the only mainstream mfr. still in the prosumer filmscanner market. They're good but the LED lightsource is prone to grain aliasing on some materials, and DoF is limited as the source is not bright enough to allow a small lens aperture, so film flatness/focus can be an issue. I'm still using a Polaroid 4000 which is now 6-7 years old, and I get better results than I could manage in the wet darkroom with a Durst+Componon S and half-glass carrier, at 16x12. The downside with the Polaroid is that there is no ICE dust/scratch tech, so manual repair of poor negs is hard and long. Probably the best later filmscanner is the Minolta Dimage 5400. That includes ICE and is a very nice scanner. Unfortunately it was axed during the Konica Minolta merger. 5400's in good condition are in considerable demand and sometimes sell on eBay for more than their last new price. A lot of flatbeds now scan 35mm film and are OK for casual use or larger formats to modest sizes, but unless very costly the optics don't match dedicated filmscanners. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep. <http://tonysleep.co.uk> co.uk [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
RE: [Digital BW] Scanner or not
2008-04-04 by E Neilsen