I was going to stay out of this, because I sound like an old skipping record when it comes to this subject.
However, in fairness, I have to respond. Some film scanners handle depth of field better than others. For instance, I have not experienced a film frame or slide which has enough curvature when using the HP S10 or S20, the Minolta Dual II or the Polaroid SS4000 series scanners to cause any area to be out of focus. Many complaints have come to public forums about Nikon depth of field being inadequate to capture the full 35mm frame in focus with either glass mounts, special slide mounts or special pre-handling of film strips. The two main issues determining whether a CCD scanner has enough depth of field is 1) the aperture of the lens used (determined by the brightness of the light source and other design issues), and 2) the length of the optical path. The scanners I mention above appear to have either long enough optical paths (the HP models are fixed focus so obviously have a fairly substantial depth of field) or a bright enough light source to allow for a stopped down lens. Therefore, I have to challenge your statement that "every scanner has problems with "curved" film..." The scanners I mention seemed to have no such problems with any film with "normal curvature" which I consider my films to have. On the other hand, "normal curvature of film" is indeed adequate to cause areas to be out of focus with at least some Nikon scanners. Art Jan Copier wrote: > Barry, > > Ok, your right, but be reasonble, every scanner has problems with "curved" > film (accept a drum scanner I suppose), I'm having a Coolsacn IV and very > satisfied with it (manual focus is possible), keep your negs safe and flat > as possible. > > Jan > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "barry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 3:15 PM > Subject: [filmscanners] RE: OT: leben list > > > I am researching the purchase of a new scanner. I am considering the Nikon > IV and others. Does anyone have any experience with the Nikon? I am told it > has a focusing problem with currved negatives. > > Where is the Digital B&W, The Print site? > regards > > bt > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Glenn Thureson > Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 7:23 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: OT: leben list > > > You're right, I missed that. I've been reading the archives over at Digital > B&W, The Print. Hours later, I've finally checked my Inbox. Thanks for > noticing (not that we can fix it). > > Glenn > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 9:33 AM > Subject: [filmscanners] OT: leben list > > > Sorry if you find this a bit off topic, but as I've some of your names on > overthere, I want to ask if I am the only one not receiving anything from > the Leben scan (and Epson) lists since Wednesday (June 19)? > > Robert > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
