Unfortunately Sir is broke and has no money. He was only enthusiastically
supporting the notion of *factual* comparative information of reasonable
validity as a means of choosing between scanners. As opposed to trying to
do it based on opinion, unverifiable comparisons and manufacturer's claims.
(It was by the way the search for good quality data that explains how he
came to find this list in the first place after being drawn to your reviews).
I do hope to be in a position to buy a scanner sometime in the next year or
so and it is for this that I enthusiastically devour good comparative info.
While I agree with many comments that the 8000 and 120 are obviously very
similar in what can be achieved with each, I believe there are probably a
few characteristics that might make you choose one over the other,
specifically - ultimate resolution, focus-ability over the whole film,
grain visibility, shadow detail...and dust/scratch visibility and
correction. But maybe even these are into diminishing returns already..
Julian
PS as well as the software you'd need the same images at each scanner
location no?
At 11:34 10/07/01, you wrote:
>On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:13:54 +1000 Julian Robinson
>(julian@austarmetro.com.au) wrote:
>
> > - when you see something in one and can directly try it on the
> > other,or tweek one to match the other.
>
>What's needed is a PC Anywhere/VNC/Carbon Copy remote control of a range
>of scanners. Then you could do this from anywhere.
>
>How much would Sir wish to pay for such a service? :)
>
>Regards
>
>Tony Sleep
> - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
>info & comparisons
Julian Robinson
in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
