Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- From: Scott Schuckert <not@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 09:53:19 -0400
In article <87y7yhqu07.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxx>, David Dyer-Bennet
<dd-b@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Flatbeds of the consumer kind are not useful for making serious scans
of 35mm (or smaller) film. And while I'm a big fan of Consumer
REports -- only for consumer items, which film scanners very
definitely are not.
Heh. In the camera retail business, we used to live in terror of
Consumer Reports. You never knew what fool thing they'd recommend, and
people would start asking for; the selection methodology was so bad it
seemed completely random.
I remember the year they recommended the Miranda Sensorex over the
Nikon Ftn, because it was so much MORE RELIABLE. See, they asked people
who had them how many repairs they had, but NOT how many rolls a year
they'd shot...
Oh, and I'll add to the chorus of condemnation of flatbed scanners for
film. It's a fun feature for very occasional or non-critical use, but
that's about it.
You will hear contrary opinions. I have a friend who's a reasonably
well-known commercial artist (not photographer) who tells everyone that
a flatbed w/film adapter is "perfect." Turns out he's never seen the
results from anything else.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- From: William Graham
- Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- From: Nicholas O. Lindan
- Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- References:
- film vs. flatbed scanners
- From: Mike - EMAIL IGNORED
- film vs. flatbed scanners
- Prev by Date: Re: unexpectd film scanner problem
- Next by Date: Re: Nikon focusing screen sizes?
- Previous by thread: Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- Next by thread: Re: film vs. flatbed scanners
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading