Re: [Leica] 4x6

[Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>]

John Collier wrote:
> 
> Mark,
> 
> I have been digesting your answer and would like ask if you think that your
> Nikon neg scanner was a poor investment when you can print off some XbyYs
> and then just use your less expensive flat bed scanner (and get better
> results)? I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
> 
> John Collier
> 
> > From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
> >
> > Afterswift@aol.com wrote:
> >>
> >> The 4x6 print scans much better than I had expected even with a moderately
> >> priced flatbed. The Photo Deluxe software native to the HP 6200 seems to
> >> favor it.
> >>
> >> br
> >
> > I have a better flatbed a Umax Power look III and when I scan anything from
> > 2x3
> > to 10x12 i end up with better stuff then i get with my Nikon LS-2000. Even not
> > the best printed stuff comes out better in the end.
> > Markwr

The results i get form the Nikon LS-2000 are great, i don't really find the file
size constraining.
I'd always thought when everyone first started talking scanners and they were
all talking flatbeds that id rather be dealing with raw information. The
original neg.
This Umax Power look III flatbed I mainly got to scan medium format or larger film.
But gives a huge file size when working with anything that is not very small and
it seems to work out very well.
You'd think it would be best to make a flat soft paper print or even film print
for the flatbed;
but it seems to do OK with crushed shadows and other imperfect tonalities.
I'm got i can just stick a neg or slide in that Nikon though.
A toss up. I don't know yet. Its all new to me.
And in the last weeks I've gone analog all over again, been in the darkroom.
Markwr
I would not try to get by without a neg scanner for at least 35mm if not medium format.