Re: scanner "policy" ?

[ireland@blazenet.net (Robert Brummett)]

>>Just exactly what is the LUG policy re scanned images?
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by the "LUG policy" re scanned images.
>
>I have shifted about 95% of my once darkroom work to film and flatbed
>scanners and my computer. The chemical, wet portion of my photography is
>almost exclusively negative production now, although I still do
>enlargements for subminiature format (Minox 9.5mm) because that negative
>is too small to scan effectively with a 2700dpi film scanner.
>
>I use a Polaroid SprintScan 35E/S film scanner for 35mm negs and an Apple
>Color OneScanner 600/27 for print scanning. I use various photo editing
>software tools to adjust tonal scale, exposure balance, etc on my images.
>I output the images either to a high quality color inkjet printer,
>computer viewable image formats; I can also send them to a service bureau
>to have large format negatives made with a film recorder and large format
>prints with a dye sublimation printer (or other high quality hardcopy
>output device).
>
>The cost of the whole system, end to end, is approximately $4500. The
>flatbed scanner is a 600dpi optical resolution unit, 9bit/color sampling,
>24bit color image output and cost about $390. The film scanner is a
>2700dpi optical resolution unit, 10 bit/color sampling, 24 bit output,
>and cost about $1500. The computer is an older Macintosh PowerPC model
>with 56MB of RAM and 2.2GB of available storage space, a faster current
>system setup similarly would cost about $2000 or so.
>
>This system provides an amateur like me a very usable photographic
>workstation, allows me to get excellent use of my investment in cameras,
>demonstrates to me that the ultimate quality of the images is not
>strictly bounded by the tools for what I'm after. A professional,
>prepress grade system would require higher resolution scanning and output
>devices and a more powerful computer, allowing more productivity and a
>little more capability.
>
>Some pictures from my first efforts with this system are available for
>viewing on my website.
>
>Godfrey
> http://www.bayarea.net/~ramarren - use the personal photography link

Godfrey-

Yes, I know all that. I'm in the same boat myself re electronic
time-savers. What I meant was just what I said-- what is the LUG policy re
scanned images, binaries, pix, whatever? Can we post
images/binaries/scanned images/pix on the LUG and not get our a**** flamed
off by the likes of ??? and ??? and ???. THAT was my question. (Watch now:
I'll get some sort of abuse for my alledged clarification!)

Robert