Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Test scans from walt - minolta 5400

Subject: [OM] Re: Test scans from walt - minolta 5400
From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 08:26:36 -0700
Here is an article about drum scanners and a discussion of the 
differences between scans on a drum and a flat bed that were not that 
different. I think consensus is that there is not much information on 
film beyond 4000 dpi. So the differences are subtle.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/scanners/drum_scans.shtml

In addition drum scanners are very expensive and people end up paying a 
service for a scan. I know Reichmann at Luminous Landscape said that he 
felt he could get consistently better scans on an Imacon Flextite 
himself that a drum scan done by an operator getting $15 per hour. May 
be something to that.

Here he compares a Canon 1Ds image with a 6x7 drum scan that cost him 
$300 and an Imacon scan he did himself.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml



Winsor
Long Beach, California
USA
On May 21, 2004, at 7:17 PM, Bolty wrote:

> The one thing from a drum scanner that I think you will get is a 
> slightly
> better edge to edge sharpness. I would be interested to see the 
> differnce
> that you could achieve from a drum scan thou!
> Speeking of that!... Has anyone got an image to show the differnce 
> from a
> drum scan and dedicted film scanner that they may have!... I saw the 
> link
> that (I think) Moose posted with the differnce from a flat bed image 
> from a
> print tothat of a dedicated film scanner! There was a big differnce 
> there,
> so just curious on this one!


The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus 
List Problem"
        

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz