ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












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

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

[filmscanners] Re: 3 year wait


  • To: lexa@lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 3 year wait
  • From: "Mike Kersenbrock" <michaelk@aracnet.com>
  • Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 18:14:59 -0700
  • References: <3CDF1353.7DC100F8@aracnet.com>
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

> > The key practical point is that many if not most film recorders do not
> > actually operate at 4K despite the written specs so their resolution in ppi

I can't speak about the specific units you folk are talking about,
but my Polaroid film scanner (model 7000) is called a "4K" unit. It
puts down 4096 pixels by 2732 pixels (from memory, ...it's about that)
using std 35mm format.  This is about 2700 dpi that it lays down
onto the film.  From what I've been able to tell searching the web,
their "8K" unit isn't supposed to gain much on 35mm film (but greatly
on larger format films).

Mike K.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.