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: BWP seeks scanner

The following links go a long way toward showing what's possible on the
film, and what can be scanned from it:



Cliff Ober

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Raphael Bustin
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 6:13 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: BWP seeks scanner

While I know that this topic has been debated
many times, on many forums, I've come to the
conclusion that perhaps that very high estimate
of film resolution may be optimistic.

I've never seen a drum scan of any of my slides
or negatives, but I've seen scans from a large
variety of CCD scanners, including the SprintScan
4000 and now my 8000 ED -- both rated at 4000 dpi.

In a nutshell -- I don't really see a significant
increase in sharpness going from 2700 dpi to 4000
dpi.  And this is with slow (ISO 100) negative
films like Reala, Supra, etc, using decent optics
and with the camera on a tripod.

What I do see from these hi-res scanners is lower
noise, and better tonality.  With the 8000, I'm
enjoying the extra dynamic range. But I'm not really
seeing a major increase in sharpness or apparent

Maybe one needs to go with fancy German lenses to
see that.  Or maybe it's the case that the scanner's
internal optical system is the limiting factor.

Whatever the reason -- my point is that this claim
of "greater than 4000 dpi" for the effective
resolution of film is rather optimistic.  I'm curious
what it would take to actually observe and realize
such a high resolution.

rafe b.


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.