Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 4/19/99 9:32:35 AM, freespeech@jalister.free-online.co.uk writes: << I have become fascinated with the possibilities of film scanners and would welcome any feedback on the Nikon LS30 versus the LS2000. I am very new to the whole thing of computers and have a ingrained suspicion of anything DIGITAL so any help in overcoming this would be welcome. >> I've not used the latest Nikon coolscan, but I used the LS1000 extensively and found that it tended toward sharp, but overly contrasty scans that also greatly exaggerated image flaws such as dust and scratches. I understand that the newest version has an extended scanning range and software patches that address these issue, but there are other scanners that work better. I have a Polaroid Sprintscan 35 Plus that is top notch. It has a great scanning range and although image flaws do show up, it doesn't have the coolscan's habit of exaggerating them. We regularly publish full bleed images scanned from film and they look great. We also output images on an Epson inkjet printer and the results are spectacular. PhotoShop is a good thing. I wouldn't think of handling images for publication in our newspaper in any other way. The controls are very intuitive and it's easy to make the switch from the darkroom if you don't mind having more precise burning and dodging controls, the ability to adjust color or black and white tones with near infinite range on the fly, and the ability to revert to saved if you make a mistake. From time to time, I get nostalgic for the smell of Dektol, and I'd love to make a few prints for the wall, but in the real world of publication deadlines and the grunt work of getting pictures on the printed page, the days of the darkroom are passed. Rick Musacchio