Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: SS120 & Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?



Art wrote:

>It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
>scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
>that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
>and just basically use the same optics for all the film formats.

I seem to be missing something, here. All my scanners have "zoom" 
capability, but on the screen, only--they can make the image bigger, just as 
I can with my own imaging software. Can a scanner actually enlarge an area 
with an enlarging lens? Well, why not--I can do it with a loupe, can't I?

So let's say I select a 1/4" x 1/4" section of a slide that would normally 
be scanned at 2400ppi on my Scanwit--if a 2x scanning lens were available, 
would this then appear like a 1/2" x 1/2" section of the slide, at 2400ppi? 
Given this, it would seem that the resolution of the section would become 
4800ppi.

Somehow, I don't see this as likely, tempering it with a bit of skepticism 
for mfgr specs. Can a 4000ppi scanner in fact boost its effective scanning 
resolution to 8000ppi, or did it boost it to 4000 in the first place with a 
magnifying lens, from which point it cannot improve?  Inquiring minds seem 
to want to know. :-)

Best regards--LRA


>From: Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120 & Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
>Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 03:14:33 -0700
>
>It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
>scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
>that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
>and just basically use the same optics for all the film formats.
>
>That eliminates the need for fancy (and maybe problematic)
>mechanics that change the film position or zoom lenses.
>Other than the Minolta Multi, the other MF scanners seem to work
>similarly to a flatbed, in the sense that regardless of the size of the
>original, the resolution of the CCD remains fixed (in this case at 4000
>dpi.)
>
>If the Nikon uses a 10,000 pixel element CCD, they could have projected
>the 35mm frame width onto it, and claimed an over 10,000 dpi resolution
>scan.  Of course, that would have resulted in almost as large a file as
>a MF at 4000 dpi.  Further, it is possible they cannot really produce a
>10,000 dpi stepper motor system that is reliable.  That's getting
>awfully demanding in a consumer product.
>
>Art
>
>rafeb wrote:
>
> >
> > Good question, Jeff.
> >
> > >From Nikon's specs, we know that they're using a
> > 10,000 x 3 element CCD.  Across a 2.25" media,
> > this comes out to roughly 4000 dpi.
> >
> > We also know from the specs there's some fancy
> > 14-element zoom lens in the box.
> >
> > What's unclear then is why they can't or don't
> > provide better than 4000 dpi on 35 mm media,
> > or why a "zoom" lens, at all.
> >
> > rafe b.
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.