Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]About 8 minutes for a 35mm RGB 5000+ SPI scan... but oh the shadow detail and overall quality! It's worth every minute to me. :-) Jim Philippe Orlent wrote: > Those are r e a l l y slow, aren't > they? > > > > Op 18-jan-06, om 16:59 heeft Jim Hemenway het volgende geschreven: > >> Daniel: >> >> Buy a Leafscan now while you still have the chance. They're slow but >> the resulting scans, 35mm to 4x5", are up there with drum scans. >> >> And, Silverfast is now available for it, which means that you can now >> use the Leafscan with XP and OS X. >> >> Jim >> >> Daniel Ridings wrote: >> >>> Boy, I wish they did meet mine. On the other hand, commercial scans >>> can't even touch black and white (unless it's the C41 emulsions, I >>> guess). >>> The cemetery shots I had around a couple of weeks ago were commercial >>> scans. They sharpen them way past what you would really want. More or >>> less results in scans that you can't work with. Possibly print out >>> without any adjustments, but if they don't get it right, there's not >>> much you can do with the image without it falling apart. >>> We hear a lot about films, cameras and film manufacturers going down >>> the tubes, but there is another aspect that has me frightened. Film >>> scanners. >>> A year ago you could pick up a film scanner and chose between a >>> professional (expensive) or consumer model. The consumer models were >>> usually well nigh just a good for all practical purposes (up to 8x10). >>> I fielded a scanning question recently and went to B&H to provide >>> some links. >>> The film scanners are definitely a dying breed. They are going faster >>> than film manufacturers and film cameras. >>> This alone will drive me back into the darkroom. If I can't get a good >>> scan, I can't print digitally. I bought a good scanner a year and a >>> half ago (top of the line Nikon), but I better baby that one and keep >>> the el-cheapo Minolta around as a back-up. >>> I'm not impressed with the results of converting digital to b/w. I am >>> also not comfortable with SLR's (probably my main reason for not going >>> digital. I have an SLR but it just feels too big to work with). I'll >>> never be able to justify a digital M (assuming there ever is such a >>> thing). If film scanners disappear, I will be up the proverbial shit >>> creek without a paddle. >>> Daniel >>> On 1/18/06, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Daniel - Well sometimes you just have to do things yourself, don't >>>> you, when you want them right. :-) Commercial scans easily meet my >>>> needs for the moment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 1/18/06, Richard S. Taylor <r.s.taylor@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> - Film is easily processed and digitized. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I shoot film too ... but I don't think I'd go _that_ far. Easily >>>>> processed, yes, but digitized, no. At least not easily digitized if >>>>> you are a little picky (I am pathologically pedantic so I have to do >>>>> it myself. It isn't easy.) >>>>> >>>>> Daniel >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >