Re: filmscanners: Coolscan 4000

[Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>]

PAUL GRAHAM wrote:

>> Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 09:16:54 +0930
>> From: "Mark T." <markthom@camtech.net.au>
>> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
>> 
>> At 04:11 PM 7/04/01 +0000, you wrote:
>> 
>
>> Can I just add to this - *please* make sure that the test slide is a
>> 'curved' one.  Old Kodachromes in cardboard mounts are often like this -
>> you may have to look harder to find a plastic-mounted one with a good
>> bend..  Sorry if I am stating the obvious. :)
>> 
>> Regards, Mark T.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and while you're at it, take the film pressure plate out of the back of
> your expensive pro-35mm camera before you take the picture.
> and then blame the camera manufacturer if your images are soft.
> 
> jeez, you guys...
> what planet are you living on?
> 
> pg

Paul,

I think its called the "real world".  My Kodachromes, all 50,000 or so 
of which are mounted in cardboard frames, consistently tend to be convex 
on the non-emusion side, meaning they have a peak in the center.
That's a real world circumstance.

Further, most slide scanners, as discussed previously, have a great 
enough depth of field to keep such a slide in focus.  On the other hand, 
even cheap cameras tend to have film pressure plates.  To my knowledge, 
Nikon does not supply a glass carrier as standard equipment either, so 
even they do not consider it an essential piece of equipment to get good 
scans on their machines.

Therefore, I think you have a real apple and oranges situation here.

Art