John wrote:
> Don't think that these $800-3000 scanner toys we are using
> are the best it will get or the best that is out there.
I have a Nikon LS30. It's technology which is what, four years old? There's
much better scanners on the market now if one has the money. I don't.
Having said that, I get excellent (IMO) results from the LS30 with the right
films exposed well. The LS30 is able to produce scans with enough resolution
for a magazine cover page at 300dpi, and at the moment, that's all I need.
> If you have an image that is that "good" get a drum scan
> from Nancy Scans (11,000 dpi?) or somewhere.
I suspect the cost of sending the film from Austraila to the States and
returning the result on a CDR (if indeed an 11K scan would fit) would be
prohibitive. More to the point, I have no need for that sort of resolution,
nor does the magazine I'm supplying files to. If I was fortunate enough
to be supplying photos to National Geographic however...
> I am not saying you can't get good results and sell work
> using these scanners but lenses and film are more of a
> high quality constant than the digital age we have just
> begun to get into.
Precisely why I'm looking at getting better glass in front of the film.
Rob
Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
