Re: [Digital BW] Re: Flatbed scanners with film adaptors - good, bad, or ugly?
2002-07-09 by Julian Thomas
I've always been suspicious of his conclusions - could someone with technical know-how take a look at this http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/gf.htm and see if you think his methodology is skewed? Julian ----- Original Message ----- From: "heliar333" <heliar@...> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:00 PM Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Flatbed scanners with film adaptors - good, bad, or ugly? > > While shopping for a new flatbed scanner, I came across two that > > feature built in film adaptors capable of scanning any film or > > transparency - up to 4x5" for the Canon D2400UF CanoScan and up > > to 6x9" for the Epson Perfection 2450 Photo Scanner. Both feature > > 2400x4800 dpi 48 bit scans, street price around $400. > > > > Does anyone have experience with these or similar scanners? How do > > they compare with dedicated film or drum scanners? Are they close > > quality wise, or is this too good to be true? > > Having read at www.kenrockwell.com that flatbeds often deliver only > 60% of their promised resolution, I decided to test with my own > equipment. > > I have both an Epson 1640 and a Minolta Dimage Multi Pro. The Epson > claims to deliver a 1600 dpi scan, but in fact, it most closely > matches the Minolta at 800 dpi. SO I'd say that 60% is probably a > good number. > > On the other hand, I find that the Epson does a better job getting > true colors off the film, and has a smoother, broader range of grey > values. > > Applying the same logic to other Epsons, I imagine that the 2450, > which claims to get 2400 dpi, delivers somewhere around 1500 dpi. At > 300 dpi output, this means a maximum enlargement of 5x. For 4x5, this > equates to a little under 16x20. For smaller film, 5x gets small. But > you get what you pay for - unless Epson has plans to deliver a real > 2400 dpi scanner soon. I'd gladly pay teixe the current price. > > In the meanwhile, I have my sights on the Microtek Artix 2500. Others > have attested that it delivers a genuine 2500 dpi. At $3500, it ought > to. I have seen some gorgeous quadtone prints by Richard Wolfson, who > uses an Agfa 2500 (made by Microtek) for his 4x5 negatives - and they > are stunning and sharp at 20x24 inches and beyond. > > > > > > 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.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > >