A comparison of the LS4000 and some Imacon, a while back, seemed to indicate
that the LS4000 has resolution roughly equal to the Imacon's 3200dpi (some
parts of a test image were better, others worse).
Does anyone have a thorough understanding of this? Have I got the wrong end
of the stick?
Can someone explain how to go from ppi to lpi?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of BeckettJB@aol.com
> Sent: 29 July 2001 20:03
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: 35mm filmscanner choice
> I appreciate all the feedback to date. It seems that the SS4000
> is the "tried
> and true" choice, a scanner with a track record. Roger's point
> about software
> being no substitute for resolution/dpi is well taken. Does the stated
> manufacturer's dpi spec. correlate exactly with how many lpi you
> get in the
> final scan? (I noted in a Pop Photo review the IV ED's "optical
> was 53.3 lpi while the nikon 4000 was 60 lpi, so despite having
> roughly 75%
> of the 4000's stated dpi it achieved roughly 90% of its optical resoving
> power...hmmmm, is this a meaningful test?) The SS4000, not being
> a recently
> released scanner was unfortunately not included in their testing.
> What would really be nice at this point would be a head to head
> between the new Canon 4000 and the SS4000...At this point I am
> leaning toward
> the Canon because of its FARE feature. But, it has only been out
> for a few
> months so has had little time to be evaluated by many users.. I'm
> a little
> nervous about being an "early adopter"