Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/18

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

Subject: [Leica] Canon 30D?
From: philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent)
Date: Wed Jan 18 09:25:25 2006
References: <p06230928bff2d2071d42@131.142.12.152> <2A7A189F-4FC4-44C6-9370-7A0BFFD66B00@spectare.com> <p0623092ebff34c2cf483@131.142.12.152> <a2f8f4470601171919h6a427487o9c181d2b6825cfd4@mail.gmail.com> <p0623092fbff3777218c1@131.142.12.152> <a2f8f4470601180018v2e12ab20xeae162850e86bb2b@mail.gmail.com> <43CE65C4.3020701@hemenway.com>

Those are r       e        a        l          l         y slow,  
aren't they?



Op 18-jan-06, om 16:59 heeft Jim Hemenway het volgende geschreven:

> Daniel:
>
> Buy a Leafscan now while you still have the chance.  They're slow  
> but the resulting scans, 35mm to 4x5", are up there with drum scans.
>
> And, Silverfast is now available for it, which means that you can  
> now use the Leafscan with XP and OS X.
>
> Jim
>
> Daniel Ridings wrote:
>
>> Boy, I wish they did meet mine. On the other hand, commercial scans
>> can't even touch black and white (unless it's the C41 emulsions, I
>> guess).
>> The cemetery shots I had around a couple of weeks ago were commercial
>> scans. They sharpen them way past what you would really want. More or
>> less results in scans that you can't work with. Possibly print out
>> without any adjustments, but if they don't get it right, there's not
>> much you can do with the image without it falling apart.
>> We hear a lot about films, cameras and film manufacturers going down
>> the tubes, but there is another aspect that has me frightened. Film
>> scanners.
>> A year ago you could pick up a film scanner and chose between a
>> professional (expensive) or consumer model. The consumer models were
>> usually well nigh just a good for all practical purposes (up to  
>> 8x10).
>> I fielded a scanning question recently and went to B&H to provide  
>> some links.
>> The film scanners are definitely a dying breed. They are going faster
>> than film manufacturers and film cameras.
>> This alone will drive me back into the darkroom. If I can't get a  
>> good
>> scan, I can't print digitally. I bought a good scanner a year and a
>> half ago (top of the line Nikon), but I better baby that one and keep
>> the el-cheapo Minolta around as a back-up.
>> I'm not impressed with the results of converting digital to b/w. I am
>> also not comfortable with SLR's (probably my main reason for not  
>> going
>> digital. I have an SLR but it just feels too big to work with). I'll
>> never be able to justify a digital M (assuming there ever is such a
>> thing). If film scanners disappear, I will be up the proverbial shit
>> creek without a paddle.
>> Daniel
>> On 1/18/06, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> Daniel - Well sometimes you just have to do things yourself, don't
>>> you, when you want them right.  :-)  Commercial scans easily meet my
>>> needs for the moment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 1/18/06, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - Film is easily processed and digitized.
>>>>
>>>> I shoot film too ... but I don't think I'd go _that_ far. Easily
>>>> processed, yes, but digitized, no. At least not easily digitized if
>>>> you are a little picky (I am pathologically pedantic so I have  
>>>> to do
>>>> it myself. It isn't easy.)
>>>>
>>>> Daniel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


Replies: Reply from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] Canon 30D?)
In reply to: Message from jplaurel at spectare.com (Jim Laurel) ([Leica] Canon 30D?)
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Canon 30D?)
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] Canon 30D?)
Message from Jim at hemenway.com (Jim Hemenway) ([Leica] Canon 30D?)