Filmscanners mailing list archive (email@example.com)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: Test Imacon, Nikon.Polaroid
At 01:17 AM 7/14/01 -0400, Dave King wrote:
>If there are no mirrors in either, what would explain better sharpness
>in the Imacon (assuming flat film in the Polaroid and Nikon)?
A good question, Dave, and I don't have an answer..
just an observation.
In the last Traveling Portfolio that I participated
in, there were some prints -- printed on an Epson
3000, no less -- that very much stood out in terms
of sharpness and tonality. I asked the author of
those prints about the specifics, and was told that
they were from large negatives (6x7, I think) and
scanned on an Imacon. That may have been one of
the factors that led me to pursue larger film sizes,
and all the extra aggravation and expense.
Since then, I'm happy to say -- a few of my 645 shots,
scanned on the 8000, come pretty close to reproducing
that sharpness and tonality. Certainly a big step up
from 35 mm stuff, scanned on the SprintScan. Whether
it's up to "Imacon" quality, I can't say. Idle
speculation, mostly, considering the Imacon's cost.
Now if I could only get my subjects and compositions
to match those that came so easily on my old Nikon FE,
I'd be even more pleased.