Art,
> So, in conclusion, I don't think necessarily the other scanners don't
> have some of the same mechanical problems the Nikon manifests, it is
> just that the design of the other scanners tends to HIDE these problems
> by the way they capture and reconstruct the image, while, in fact, the
> Nikon LS-8000 would drastically EMPHASIZE these defects by its design
> and manner of reconstruction the image.
I'd like to add here that, apparently, the LS-4000 ED has the same
problem, since it also uses a 3-line sensor. I'm not sure how large
the effect is in that case.
> Unfortunately, so far, at any cost approaching reasonable, these factors
> apparently cannot be designed out of scanners yet, and Nikon, it would
> appear, did not factor these physical limitations into the LS-8000. In
> fact, this banding problem showed up long before the LS-8000, in some of
> the LS-2000 models. I suspect it was further aggravated by the size of
> the structures needed in the LS-8000 to handle larger film sizes. I
> also suspect this banding problem will become more noticeable with aging
> of the device, as tolerances get sloppier still.
Really? As far as I can tell, none of the previous scanners had more
than one CCD line (LS-2000 certainly didn't), and all Nikon Coolscans
had a LED light source, so where did the banding come from?
> If I knew that my last name translates from higher German to "Eureka!"
> or "Enlightenment".
Actually, "endlich" means "at last", and there is no such word in
German as "entlich". And I'm not a military official either.
Andras
===========================================================================
Major Andras
e-mail: andras@users.sourceforge.net
www:
===========================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
