> David, concerning Polaroid's negative profiling plans for the SS 120, you've > received some "why bother" and "it's a bad idea" comments from Austin > Franklin while Isaac Crawford defended the idea. I'm sorry that I gave the impression that "it's a bad idea". I don't think it's a bad idea, I just don't see the merit in it, at least for me. I do believe that it will do some people some good, as a starting point. But to believe that you can just 'pick your film' and your scan will be perfect, I think would not be the case, and lead to disappointment. As a note, I don't believe other vendors are taking this approach, for what ever reason. Anyone know if I mistaken about this?
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 ... Dave King
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and n... Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 ... Dave King
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan ... Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan ... Michael Moore
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan ... Tony Sleep
- filmscanners: workflow Steve Greenbank
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proil... Hemingway, David J
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative ... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proil... RogerMillerPhoto
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative ... Austin Franklin
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negat... Lawrence Smith
- filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative ... Johnny Deadman
- filmscanners: Scanner software (was Sprint... Roy Smyth
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new n... Arthur Entlich
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new n... Julian Robinson
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and n... Austin Franklin
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negat... tflash
- RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new n... Lawrence Smith
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new n... Arthur Entlich
- Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proil... Lynn Allen