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]

[filmscanners] Re: Some findings/thoughts on the Sprintscan120 (comments verywelcome please)

In the UK the Flextight is 4,700 compared to 2,100 for the SS 120.   Quite
a difference still.  The LS8000 is 2,700, so a lot nearer.  But is it 600


On 14/4/02 5:28 pm, "Dave King" <kingphoto@mindspring.com> wrote:

> I agree with your current observations except I find Insight to reproduce
> any color transparency I have tried pretty well.  Also, the 35mm strip
> holder has sprocket hole tabs movable by the "film position slider",
> enabling the film to be positioned side to side with little effort.  After
> closing the top piece you have to gently bracket the film position slider
> until the tabs "fall into" the sprocket holes.  Perhaps you've already done
> this and still find it fiddly, but I was satisfied with this mechanism.
> The price reduction of the Flextight Photo certainly makes it viable, and
> you may want to consider the Nikon LS-8000 as well.
> Dave
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simon Lamb" <simon@sclamb.com>
> I have had some private communication with Art Entlich regarding the SS 120
> and he has been, and is continuing to be, very helpful and supportive.  I
> though I would share some of the comments that I made with the group to see
> if anyone has any comments to make.  All would be welcome.
> ____________________
> I have scanned quite a few slides so far and have had varying results.  The
> film term in Insight for Kodak Porta 160 is way, way off.  The resulting
> scan bears absolutely no resemblance to the original neg. or even the
> prints, and required so much work in Photoshop to recover it that I gave up,
> it just seemed unrecoverable.  I think the film terms in general within
> Insight need to be reviewed.  Scanning using the generic slide terms when
> using Provia also produced bad results.  The only good scan I got was using
> the generic slide term when scanning Kodak E100VS.  As for black and white,
> after over ten attempts with Scala, Delta 100 and Delta 400 I gave up.  The
> scans where very dark, the black point stopped dead on all scans at about
> 30, as if all the pixels at that end had been pushed up against a wall.
> So, I moved on to using Vuescan.  The Provia scanned well although the
> colour accuracy was not too good.  My Nikon Coolscan LS30 produced a better
> scan from a colour perspective, although obviously not as detailed.  The
> Delta 100 scan was one of the best black and white scans I had ever seen.
> Absolutely perfect tonal balance and immense detail.  The Scala was good but
> lost some detail in the highlights.  The Porta 160VC was detailed but there
> was a significant amount of white speckling all over the scan.  I assume
> from this, and the fact that the Insight term produced the worst scan
> imaginable, that the SS 120 just has difficulty with the Portra emulsion.  A
> shame, since my LS30 scans it very well.
> So where am I now.  Well, the SS 120  can obviously produce detailed scans,
> but I will have to rely on Ed Hamrick's Vuescan to get them, especially for
> black and white which is a big proportion of my work.  I am not really happy
> about relying on third party software because should Ed decide to pack it in
> then I will have a scanner from which it will be difficult to get the
> results I need.  The carriers are fiddly.  In many cases the 6X6 film does
> not lie perfectly flat in the carrier, and it is impossible to line up a
> strip of 35mm unless you leave the carrier slightly undone.  Most of the
> scans I did using Insight required a lot of work in Photoshop to get them
> close to what I wanted,  and some were just too far out to be workable.
> I think I will return the SS 120 and try the Flextight Photo.  I did find
> when comparing it side by side with the SS 120 in the store that the Photo
> just about always reproduced the image as near as possible to the original
> colour, contrast etc.  The built in film profiles seemed to be accurate.  It
> may take twice as long to scan, but I may save that additional time not
> having to do so much in Photoshop.
> Your comments on my findings would be welcomed.  I know a lot of people use
> the SS 120, so either I am doing something wrong or they just put the effort
> in to correct images post scanning.
> I was using Insight 5.5.1.
> Regards.
> Simon

Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.