At 03:53 PM 1/17/1999 +0100, Claes you wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I have a slight-off topic that I need some advice on. I have noticed that
>some of you use a slide scanner, and I have become interested myself.....
>
-snip-
>Is it possible to get a good slide scanner under say USD 1000? Or
>preferably even less.
>
>Also, what are the pros/cons of using slides and a slide scanner compared
>to prints and a good flat-bed scanner?
>
Hi Claes,
You can check out my pics on the [OM content -->] unofficial Olympus
gallery (thanks Garth), which were made with a <$1000 film scanner. (It's a
*film* scanner BTW, not slide scanner: not a negligible point, since it is
great to be able to scan negatives too.) I don't have any experience with
any scanner other than my own, so I won't make claims for it, except to say
that the scanner itself has been only part of the battle. It is very easy
to get a scan, but you have to learn a lot about the hardware, software,
and about how to judge desirables from a computer screen to end up with
first-class results.
To think clearly about flatbeds vs. film scanners, think first about the
source for your data in each case. As a source, a very good print will net
you 100-200 dpi of data. You can scan this with a flat bed and at best
duplicate it and print up the same size print without a problem. A film
scanner will give you exponentially more data, so that, for instance, you
can print a scan 8x10 at 240 dpi or greater. The bottom line advantage of
this is it allows you to make enlargements which are very high quality. If
you want to have both capabilities, the HP Photosmart scanner has the
capability of scanning both film and up to 5x7 prints. Judging from reports
the HP is excellent value for the money.
Cheers,
Joel
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|