Garth;
Thanks for the testimonial on the Polaroid. And for the link below.
http://www.scantips.com
The link I was referring to is this one:
http://www.cix.co.uk/~tsphoto/tech/filmscan/
Great reviews of a dozen or more scanners.
>Yes. A friend of mine who is a professional commercial photographer owns
one of these babies (a $50,000.00 >U.S. machine that he got at an auction
for $1,200.00 CDN because no-one else knew what it was or how to use it!).
Lucky guy!
I>nterestingly enough, the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 I recently acquired has
the same pixel-per-inch rating, though >with a DMax of "only" 3.6.
The figure I've seen is 3.4 and I saw that on the Polaroid page, here:
http://www.polaroid.com/products/scanners/ss4000/index.html
> He and I still have to put the output from our respective machines
together in a head-to-head contest.
They're *that* close, eh? That's what I'm looking for.
Another tidbit: even though the drum scanner he has does a DMax range
(also known as "OD," for"optical density") > of 4.0, he rarely runs across
chromes with a DMax above 3.6. Seems like Polaroid optimized their new
machine > for this range.
Thanks again
George
< 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 >
|