RE: [Leica] [Fwd: scanner]

["Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>]

Slobodan,

The point is your beliefs WRT to scanning film etc. are "unwarranted".
Though Leica images DO have an edge over most others, that edge has to do
with getting the image ON the film, not getting it OFF the film.

I also don't believe Leica could make a scanner any better (if even as good)
than other people do.  It's a different set of skills, and I doubt they have
them.  They MAY/COULD make a flat field lense for a scanner, but other than
that, there is nothing they can do better than anyone else.  Most all the
components of a scanner are off the shelf, unlike a camera, where most every
item is strictly custom.

If they wanted to spend their time doing something interesting, they should
make a full frame digital SLR, IMO.

Austin


> Hold on, have to fold my cane.
> Now to find my braille key board.
> Ok, where are we? Ah yes, there we are.
> Gee Austin, I didn't realize I had to be accountable to a technical run
> down.
> I don't write literature on the subject, and I don't think I ever will,
> as I don't have to.
> But, I am adamant about continuity with my optics, that's all.
> My own experience has always led me in that direction.
> If Leica optics didn't have that extra edge, what would be the point of
> using them?
> Wouldn't you want that extra qualitative element maintained throughout,
> to the very end product?
> Frankly, I think that is important.
> I don't think it's asking too much for a broader product support from
> Leica.
> A support that they have provided in the past with their enlarger lines.
> I have no problem with scanning, other than I would like to see Leica
> address it before they lose any more ground.
> Slobodan Dimitrov
>
>
> Austin Franklin wrote:
> >
> > Slobodan,
> >
> > So, your response is, you don't know, and can't say, what's
> "missing".  The
> > answer is, there is nothing missing...in fact, you can get better images
> > (and it's far more technically advanced) by scanning, than you
> can out of
> > chemical printing, since you have control of the tonal curves far better
> > with scanned film...and you can modify setpoints (dMax and
> dMin) to expand
> > the tonal range.  There are so many advantages to digital scanning and
> > printing, and so far, I haven't found a downside...and I've got over 30
> > years of experience in a high end chemical darkroom.  My
> darkroom experience
> > and scanning experience IS field experience, NOT bench top
> flap.  Of course,
> > getting good results assumes the scanner operator is a good scanner
> > operator, as would be the same with a chemical print requiring a good
> > chemical darkroom operator too.
> >
> > I don't know anything about the presentation you are talking
> about, so I can
> > not comment on it, but if it is as you say, it's not a good
> example of what
> > can be done, and you should not judge ALL scanning of film by one bad
> > example.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Austin
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of
> S Dimitrov
> > > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:52 PM
> > > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > > Subject: Re: [Leica] [Fwd: scanner]
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't have to compare, at least at this stage of the game. I don't
> > > have the time to waste. I'd rather do it sitting at a coffee
> house than
> > > testing _consumer_ equipment. I've owned over 50, maybe
> 60-can't seem to
> > > remember, Leica lenses, and that's including a variety of printing
> > > lenses. So I'm not exactly coming in from a position lacking
> experience.
> > > That's field experience, not bench top, where the darndest
> critters come
> > > out of the woodwork just to make one's day really interesting.
> > > What it means, is that for the time being I will only print my Leica
> > > 35mm exhibition work with my V35, period.
> > > If you want to see what's missing, check out the travelling exhibit on
> > > New York put together by the _concerned _ photographers. The
> > > presentation , with all due respect to the casualties, was enough to
> > > make me puke. I can't countenance placing my work in front of
> the public
> > > in such a technically primitive manner.
> > > Slobodan Dimitrov
> > >
> > >
> > > Austin Franklin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As far as I'm concerned there is nothing compatible with what
> > > I get from
> > > > > my Leica optics, even as close as some other product
> might come. That
> > > > > missing 5-10% from brand X is glaring, and unacceptable.
> > > > > Slobodan Dimitrov
> > > >
> > > > Slobodan,
> > > >
> > > > WHAT do you believe is missing?  What SPECIFIC aspect of a
> > > scanner is not
> > > > sufficient for your images?  I am looking for a specific
> > > technical aspect
> > > > that you claim a current midrange+ scanner doesn't "get"
> from your Leica
> > > > images.
> > > >
> > > > Austin
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html