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]

Re: filmscanners: Scanner resolution (was: BWP seeks scanner)



From: Tony Sleep <TonySleep@halftone.co.uk>


> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 07:33:35 -0700  Moreno Polloni (mp@dccnet.com)
wrote:
>
> > I don't think anyone is trying to make super critical judgements
here.
> > To me
> > the scans need to be better matched before attempting to draw any
> > conclusions about scanner quality.
>
> Even that is little help, since the operator may have subtracted
> information unequally and/or incorrectly from one or both.
>
> What we really want to know is the potential for quality, the
available
> envelope, and finding this out is a veritable gumshoe job.

How's that gum on your shoes doing these days?  <g>  Since you already
have an SS4000, I would love to hear your impressions of the LS-4000!
(Maybe you could even answer my Kodachrome question:)

Dave




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.