Digital BW, The Print

Title says it all.   I'm looking for a scanner that will handle B+W negatives 
from 4x5 inches to 8x10 inches.   I've scoured the web and found little of 
use in making a rational comparison of the three flatbeds.   

Has anyone here scanned B+W negatives with two or three of these scanners, 
and willing to give some real-world feedback as to how they compare?   I am 
using an Epson 3200 to scan my 4x5s.   Initial reports say the 4990 is not much of 
an improvement (if any) in image quality over the 3200 and 4870. 

If there is another solution for scanning LF negatives that comes in under 
$2000, please tell.

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I read a response on photo.net that the German Colorfoto magazine  
put true optical resolution of the 3200 at about 1160 dpi vs the 4870 
at 1540 dpi, which if true, is a 32% increase...  Also, know a  
serious landscape photographer that scans 5x7 in. film on a 4870 and 
makes beautiful 40x50 in. prints on a 9600 w/ IP.  Silverfast Ai  
works pretty well w/ B&W film if you find the appropriate nega fix 
profile with the right contrast, and make sure theres no clipping.  
SteveB  

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, sandersm@a... 
wrote:
> Title says it all.   I'm looking for a scanner that will handle B+W 
negatives 
> from 4x5 inches to 8x10 inches.   I've scoured the web and found 
little of 
> use in making a rational comparison of the three flatbeds.   
> 
> Has anyone here scanned B+W negatives with two or three of these 
scanners, 
> and willing to give some real-world feedback as to how they 
compare?   I am 
> using an Epson 3200 to scan my 4x5s.   Initial reports say the 4990 
is not much of 
> an improvement (if any) in image quality over the 3200 and 4870. 
> 
> If there is another solution for scanning LF negatives that comes 
in under 

> $2000, please tell.
> 
> Sanders McNew
> www.mcnew.net
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 06:29 +0000 18.3.2005, steveabrink wrote:
*******************************************

>I read a response on photo.net that the German Colorfoto magazine 
>put true optical resolution of the 3200 at about 1160 dpi vs the 4870
>at 1540 dpi, which if true, is a 32% increase...  Also

It is simple - the calculated resolution is not the same as real 
resolution - imagine the mechanical construction of such scanner, 
influence of internal heat, ...

Martin
--