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: supra 400



Don't quote me, but I recall reading somewhere that by 'scanner optimized'
Kodak meant that it is better protected against processing lab scratches.

Maris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Scales" <tscales@attglobal.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: supra 400


| Not an answer, but I had exactly the same problem with Supra 400.  Stopped
| using it even though it is supposed to be 'scanner optimized'.
|
| Tom
|
| > I have a number of supra 400 images that I will need to get
| > decent scans of. Using my SS4000 I get terrible grain
| > aliasing making the quality unacceptable. I was thinking
| > that I would have to bite the bullet and get drum scans
| > made, but it occurs to me that if aliasing is an
| > interference pattern based on ccd size a smaller ccd cell
| > size might solve the problem. Has anyone had good results
| > with this film with a 2750 (or whatever) dpi scanner,
| > especially the Nikon?
| >
| > j
| >
|
|




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.