Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/16

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Slightly OT:Artixscan 1100
From: "Isaac Crawford" <isaacc7@home.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 11:39:37 -0400
References: <200007160758.JAA23627@bird2.de.uu.net>

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Spragens" <t.spragens@cityweb.de>
To: "Leica Users digest" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2000 4:57 AM
Subject: [Leica] Re: Slightly OT:Artixscan 1100


> > From: "Henning J. Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com>
> >
> > At 9:54 PM -0400 7/14/00, Isaac Crawford wrote:
> > >    I've been thinking about getting into the digital end of things
> > >    for a while...
> > >
> > >Isaac
> >
> > ... the LS2000. It is
> > particulary in getting information out of the densest areas of a film
> > that the LS2000 has an advantage. The Polaroid 4000 has higher
> > resolution, but the Nikon does better in getting into the shadows, and
> > only the $5000+ flatbeds even start to approach either one of these as
> > far as the dynamic range is concerned.

    Actually, the Artixscan 1100 has a *published* DR of 3.9... That's kinda
what I was going after... This particular scanner is one of those dual
reflective/transmission scanners, kinda like the Agfa duoscan. That's why I
was comparing it to the Nikon...

Isaac
>

In reply to: Message from "Tim Spragens" <t.spragens@cityweb.de> ([Leica] Re: Slightly OT:Artixscan 1100)