[Leica] bring a Leica to Disneyworld?

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 3/29/07 1:31 AM, "Nathan Wajsman" <nathan@nathanfoto.com> typed:

> Mark,
> 
> Not true, at least in the Western world hand luggage scanners are safe
> for film. I have in my home and office several A3 sized prints shot on
> 1600 film (Neopan) which had been through multiple scans, back when I
> was commuting to Spain in 2004. Sometimes the same roll would be through
> the scanner at Schiphol, then in Madrid to get on the high-speed train,
> then in Sevilla for the return trip to Madrid, then at Madrid airport
> for the trip home etc.--never a problem. Never. Of course not all images
> were enlarged to such sizes, but all the ones that are on my web site
> were looked at in Photoshop at 100% (when removing dust spots) and I
> never saw any ill effects of the airports.
> 
> The only ruined rolls of film I have ever experienced were due to
> operator error (i.e. me opening the camera before rewinding the film...)
> 
> Nathan
> 
>

That's good to know than thanks Nathan.

But we have apples and oranges situation in that the excellent shots on your
site are typically generously 510x750 pixels. Bigger than most and a size I
like at 72 dpi screen size like 5x7 inch.
But at 300 dpi for a print would become a measly 2 and a quarter 3 and a
quarter inch contact sheet for brownie film size. So as a major component of
your work is not exacting as to such stuff as I'm mentioning. Its far less
exacting than a snapshot would be in showing up x ray marks or various other
marks of defect.

But your big prints before mentioned certainly would be a contender for
showing up such bad stuff if it was there the way I see it.

Mark Rabiner
8A/109s
New York, NY

markrabiner.com