Digital BW, The Print

I have a couple of questions, harmless and promise to not take over 
anyone's life ;-) of anyone who has hands on experience with the 
large format Betterlight scanner back.

Be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Cleavis

Hi Cleavis,

At 01:06 12/9/2002 +0000, you wrote:
>I have a couple of questions, harmless and promise to not take over
>anyone's life ;-) of anyone who has hands on experience with the
>large format Betterlight scanner back.

Actually, I haven't, but as we're planning to buy one for our research lab, 
I've talked a few times to Mike Collette (BetterLight's president and 
designer of their scan backs) about these devices, so maybe I could be of 
some help. I'd be interested, too, in hearing from users of this equipment 
about some practical issues regarding its use in the field.

Best regards,

Paulo Baptista
www.paulobaptista.cjb.net

>Be much appreciated.
>Thanks,
>Cleavis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Paulo Baptista <
paulo.baptista@u...> wrote:
> Hi Cleavis,
> 
> At 01:06 12/9/2002 +0000, you wrote:
> >I have a couple of questions, harmless and promise to not take over
> >anyone's life ;-) of anyone who has hands on experience with the
> >large format Betterlight scanner back.
> 
> Actually, I haven't, but as we're planning to buy one for our research lab, 
> I've talked a few times to Mike Collette (BetterLight's president and 
> designer of their scan backs) about these devices, so maybe I could be of 
> some help. I'd be interested, too, in hearing from users of this equipment 
> about some practical issues regarding its use in the field.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Paulo Baptista
> www.paulobaptista.cjb.net
> 
> 
> >Be much appreciated.
> >Thanks,
> >Cleavis

Hi All, I've used the Betterlight back in studio situations, in a  
classroom.  It could be used on location with a laptop, et. etc.  The 
images are "excellent"  120+ MB files.  It requires lots of light and 
the exposures run into minutes 6-10 being common when stopped down to 
f11-16....Bud

I have used Betterlight's immediate ancestor, the Dicomed Field Pro, 
in the field.  These units are still supported by Mike Collette and 
colleagues at Betterlight.  The Field Pro's Betterlight equivalent is 
the 6000.

I have, inter alia, use this unit to photograph buildings and one or 
two landscapes.  Pros are

- superb quality from 130mb files (double if 16 bit), the equivalent 
(easily) of slow 4x5 film drum scanned, but without the grain.

- 8 stop plus latitude (more on the latest Betterlight backs).  Looks 
even better than this in practice

- Natural, lifelike colour

- ease of use

Cons are

- heavy unit to lug around, with battery pack and laptop

- the slightest movement of the subject during the longish exposures 
ruins the shot

- not many shots from one battery charge, long exposures

I look at shots from this thing, and see in to the future of one-shot 
digital capture.  No Bayer interpolation is used, of course.

Betterlight offer superb suport, including an owner only Yahoo 
group.  
--
Quentin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "shadow22260540" 
<chines@n...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Paulo Baptista <
> paulo.baptista@u...> wrote:
> > Hi Cleavis,
> > 
> > At 01:06 12/9/2002 +0000, you wrote:
> > >I have a couple of questions, harmless and promise to not take 
over
> > >anyone's life ;-) of anyone who has hands on experience with the
> > >large format Betterlight scanner back.
> > 
> > Actually, I haven't, but as we're planning to buy one for our 
research lab, 
> > I've talked a few times to Mike Collette (BetterLight's president 
and 
> > designer of their scan backs) about these devices, so maybe I 
could be of 
> > some help. I'd be interested, too, in hearing from users of this 
equipment 
> > about some practical issues regarding its use in the field.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Paulo Baptista
> > www.paulobaptista.cjb.net
> > 
> > 
> > >Be much appreciated.
> > >Thanks,
> > >Cleavis
> 
> Hi All, I've used the Betterlight back in studio situations, in a  
> classroom.  It could be used on location with a laptop, et. etc.  
The 
> images are "excellent"  120+ MB files.  It requires lots of light 
and 
> the exposures run into minutes 6-10 being common when stopped down 
to 
> f11-16....Bud

qdfb writes:
 > I have used Betterlight's immediate ancestor, the Dicomed Field Pro, 
 > in the field.  These units are still supported by Mike Collette and 
 > colleagues at Betterlight.  The Field Pro's Betterlight equivalent is 
 > the 6000.
 > [...]

Stephen Johnson (www.sjphoto.com) uses the Better Light Digital backs
for all of his landscape work (and the Dicomed before that).  He's a
friend of mine, and I've assisted while he's been shooting, so I have
some first-and-a-half hand experience with them.  What are your
questions?

<begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>

If you're considering buying a back, you might look into buying it
through Steve, he provides a great deal more user support and hand
holding than you get directly from Mike et al.  He also has a couple
of field workshops coming up where you'd get a lot of first hand
attention.  Tell him that I sent you and that he owes me a beer....

</begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>

 > Cons are
 > 
 > - heavy unit to lug around, with battery pack and laptop

The newer Better Light processor units are about half the size, and
Mike has a source for a smaller, lighter battery that lasts longer.
Costs more though....

 > - the slightest movement of the subject during the longish exposures 
 > ruins the shot

Depends on your definition of "ruins".  The way that Steve feels about
some of the camera artifacts mirrors the way that many people feel
about the fog that moving water becomes on a longer film exposure
(just another type of artifact, after all).  I'm not always convinced,
but sometimes it does make for a nice image.

 > - not many shots from one battery charge, long exposures

True enough.  Steve has some photocells that he spreads out in the sun
when he's shooting to slow the drain.

g.

> Message: 2
>    Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 10:30:37 -0700
>    From: George Hartzell <hartzell@...>
> Subject: Re: Betterlight scanner back...any users?
> 
> qdfb writes:
>  > I have used Betterlight's immediate ancestor, the Dicomed Field Pro,
>  > in the field.  These units are still supported by Mike Collette and
>  > colleagues at Betterlight.  The Field Pro's Betterlight equivalent is
>  > the 6000.
>  > [...]
> 
> Stephen Johnson (www.sjphoto.com) uses the Better Light Digital backs
> for all of his landscape work (and the Dicomed before that).  He's a
> friend of mine, and I've assisted while he's been shooting, so I have
> some first-and-a-half hand experience with them.  What are your
> questions?
> 
> <begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>
> 
> If you're considering buying a back, you might look into buying it
> through Steve, he provides a great deal more user support and hand
> holding than you get directly from Mike et al.  He also has a couple
> of field workshops coming up where you'd get a lot of first hand
> attention.  Tell him that I sent you and that he owes me a beer....



I use a dicomed fieldPro.. just purchased on ebay back a six months.. I
use it for copy work- get a 129MB file... it is very slow-- and I have
had to work through operations and troublesome issues.. But, Mike
Collette is very available, and gives his attention to these problems
better than any manufacturer I have ever had experience with. You can
talk with him on the phone or by email, and he is very willing to be as
helpful as possible.. I did not even buy this unit from him, and he is
willing to help out as much as he can.. He will take a trade in from a
Dicomed users on one of his new backs... not a bad reason to keep
everyone happy. I met Mike at a trade show, and he is as genuine in
person as on the other end of tech support, and has been able to get my
aging dinosaur up and running. I'd go with this manufacturer.. just wish
new backs were not so expensive.. I have no idea how they work in the
field-- but I do know you need a lot of light, and things better not
move! Having said that the newer backs are quite a bit faster than mine.
and, I always considered that if I wanted a new back, the trade-in route
is attractive--- look on ebay.. they come up from time to time.

Mark MacKinnon
320studio

Mark MacKinnon writes:
 > > From: George Hartzell <hartzell@...>
 > > [...] 
 > > <begin shameless plug for a friend w/ whom I have no financial connection>
 > > 
 > > If you're considering buying a back, you might look into buying it
 > > through Steve, he provides a great deal more user support and hand
 > > holding than you get directly from Mike et al. [...]
 > 
 > I use a dicomed fieldPro.. just purchased on ebay back a six months.. I
 > use it for copy work- get a 129MB file... it is very slow-- and I have
 > had to work through operations and troublesome issues.. But, Mike
 > Collette is very available, and gives his attention to these problems
 > better than any manufacturer I have ever had experience with. You can
 > talk with him on the phone or by email, and he is very willing to be as
 > helpful as possible.. [...]

I just want to make sure that no one thinks that I'm implying that the
Better Light folk provide anything less than wonderful at customer
support.  As Tony the Tiger says, They're GGGGreat!

Steve includes a lot of one-on-one startup support with the camera,
and I've seen how valuable it can be to getting folks started.

Seems to be kind of win-win....

g.