Tony wrote: > This is exactly why I got into scanning, to expand the range of possibilities. Filmscanners and software are now powerful enough tools to easily surpass what conventional darkrooms can achieve in most respects. <clip> > And of course, hardest of the lot, taking a decent photo in the first place;) Aha, I knew it!! If this stuff had been around 30-some years ago, "I cooda bin a contenduh, Chahlie, I cooda bin a contenduh!" Oh well--I pro'ly cood'na bin a actuh, either, but it's always nice to dream. ;-) TWISI, advances in scanning are going to make some dreams come true for the kids coming along. And we were here to break the ground! :-) Best regards--LRA ----------------------------------------------- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatb... Johnny Deadman
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. ... Richard N. Moyer
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning ... Johnny Deadman
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning ... Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Arthur Entlich
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Douglas Landrum
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Gordon Tassi
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Johnny Deadman
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: Filmscanning vs. Flatbedding Lynn Allen