Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/03/06

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

Subject: [Leica] Scanner comparison
From: benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 16:32:31 +1030
References: <11246309.1934171299347176930.JavaMail.www@wsfrf1229> <AANLkTi=MHCPrxQcBe-DQgvDfL6twwqyaNoRfTEKrvmcP@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTin9q3BODm9wQZavwOn4Unrm6n-93kRoByPy=kQ1@mail.gmail.com> <5D6075FB-07A0-4BF4-8951-4D5CF4C61A6E@frozenlight.eu>

I use a v700 all the time Nathan, and agree that they are great value.
 Sometimes I even think the flatbeds work better than the Coolscan
5000 and 9000s I have here at work, but it's only with some negs.

Marty

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu> 
wrote:
> No question, but since I have no drum scanner, no prospect of ever owning 
> one, and no access to anyone who does (except paying a lab for scanning 
> for me, at great expense). So yes, the more "adequate" I can get my Epson 
> V700 to scan, the better. I am now experimenting with the height 
> adjustment on the beterscanning.com film holders.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 7, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Marty Deveney wrote:
>
>> The argument is about which scanners are *adequate*. ?A drum scanner
>> is still _best_ and I hear very few arguments with that, mostly
>> because it's pretty obvious how amazing a good drum scan is. ?A drum
>> scan is still the only way to actually resolve the grain rather than
>> to just get an image of the film grain.
>>
>> Marty
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Richard Man <richard at imagecraft.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> Regret using film or that you no longer use film?
>>>
>>> Seems like there will be no end of discussion about which scanner is 
>>> "best."
>>> Certainly the Epson seems to hold up quite well, especially for the price
>>> and convenience.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:46 AM, <philippe.amard at sfr.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Typically the kind of scan that makes me regret film ...
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> // richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/>
>>> // icc blog: <http://imagecraft.com/blog/>
>>> // photo blog: <http://www.5pmlight.com>
>>> [ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all 
>>> previous
>>> replies in your msgs. ]
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from philippe.amard at sfr.fr (philippe.amard at sfr.fr) ([Leica] Scanner comparison)
Message from richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Scanner comparison)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] Scanner comparison)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Scanner comparison)