[filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I know, scanners are still improving. Many of the members on this list, and they're too numerous to name, have been of invaluable assistance to me. I agree with Brad in that widening the the topic to be inclusive to digital photography. While I now use a digital camera regularly, I still shoot medium format film and all the image printing and distribution is in digital form. Other lists that are peculiar to a manufacturer are very limited in information and narrow in scope. Filmscanners has been by far the best information source I have found. I even ran across an old Bush Millimaki customer who also lives in my home town of Huntsville, Alabama. I know that quite literally thousands of individuals have been informed and assisted from this list. I will do all I can to help revive this list, Tony, from my area - just say the word. Please, keep up the good work, Jim Sims Brad Davis wrote: Tony, First, below is a note from Ed Lusby. I don't know what to make of his difficulties communicating, but I thought sending it along to you might be useful. Below Ed's note is something I wrote to John Mahany after he so kindly sent me the info re: cleaning an SS4000. I hate to see this list die, it has been too good to just let it disappear - especially when much of the expertise that is here (o0r was here) applies all along the process of digital photography. Other lists that are supposed to deal with various topics are usually too limited - either to a certain manufacturer, or software vendor, or the material they deal with lacks the depth that I know I need. The people here are the only ones I've found that consistently know the answers, and more. Laurie seems to be a treasure in himself, and there are several others who are as good and in some cases better. My suggestion is to widen the topic and then try to revive the list. I would be willing to help by shilling for the list on other venues. Hope we can keep it going. Brad Hi Brad, I haven't been able to post to filmscanners recently because my return email address was refused. There is nothing wrong with the return address, so I'm not sure what the problem is. I've also tried to contact Tony Sleep (the owner of filmscanners) but that message is also returned. Would you please forward this to filmscanners for me? Thanks. I share your concerns about the group, Brad, and I certainly agree that the expertise here is unparalleled. I have been astounded at the responses from the experts on the list regarding the amount of time that these people have taken to help others. I believe that is part of the problem, however. Sooner or later you just can't keep doing it. New blood needs to take over, but it takes years to learn what the professionals on this list know. Widening the scope of filmscanners is not a bad idea, but that is up to Tony Sleep. I really miss the Epson inkjet group and would like that area added as well. I'd like to hear from Tony concerning his view of filmscanners and what he would like to do with it. Ed I wish we could rejuvenate the list, I learned more here as relates to all aspects of digital imaging including Photoshop processing and printing than I have found anywhere. The level of intelligence here has been several orders of magnitude above any other imaging list I¹ve been on. Perhaps if the list were generalized to ³digital image creation², letting it grow to include discussions of various software from Lasersoft and Vuescan through various programs like PS (I saw a note elsewhere that asserted that a Lasersoft product is better than PS I think that was what was claimed) through specific printing programs. There is too much knowledge represented by Laurie, Art, David Littleboy and many others (I even come up with some useful stuff now and then) to just let it go. I know that other lists exist, but the chaff is often so thick, and the wheat so sparse that I despair. That wasn¹t true here, even when the arguments re: dMax and # of bytes were going on. Even discussions of equipment I will never own (probably), like the Minolta scanners, were useful. Is something like this worth proposing further? Or am I missing something and it would be best to just let ³Scanners² die? It is my hope that by talking with a few folks, I might refine my idea and have a better chance of selling to whoever (I don¹t even know who runs this list I can be oblivious on occasion). Who should this suggestion go to, and how might it be modified to improve its chances of succeeding, first in being tried, and second in practice? If you think this useful to post to the list, please feel free to do so with any modifications you think are useful. My goal is to find a way to get this going again, I¹m aware that I would feel the loss of a tremendous resource if this list went away.. Thanks
[filmscanners] RE: Revive this list?!
To all: I will add my support to revive this list. Unlike many of you, I recently joined in hopes of getting some good ideas to support the purchase of a filmscanner in my business. I have been disappointed in the very few messages that have come across, so much so I haven't even introduced myself. Anyway, I'm kris. nice-to-meetcha! -kris Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Revive this list?!
Maybe, the name of the group should be changed to Image Capturing and Digitalization Techniques. :-) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I know, scanners are still improving. Many of the members on this list, and they're too numerous to name, have been of invaluable assistance to me. I agree with Brad in that widening the the topic to be inclusive to digital photography. While I now use a digital camera regularly, I still shoot medium format film and all the image printing and distribution is in digital form. Other lists that are peculiar to a manufacturer are very limited in information and narrow in scope. Filmscanners has been by far the best information source I have found. I even ran across an old Bush Millimaki customer who also lives in my home town of Huntsville, Alabama. I know that quite literally thousands of individuals have been informed and assisted from this list. I will do all I can to help revive this list, Tony, from my area - just say the word. Please, keep up the good work, Jim Sims Brad Davis wrote: Tony, First, below is a note from Ed Lusby. I don't know what to make of his difficulties communicating, but I thought sending it along to you might be useful. Below Ed's note is something I wrote to John Mahany after he so kindly sent me the info re: cleaning an SS4000. I hate to see this list die, it has been too good to just let it disappear - especially when much of the expertise that is here (o0r was here) applies all along the process of digital photography. Other lists that are supposed to deal with various topics are usually too limited - either to a certain manufacturer, or software vendor, or the material they deal with lacks the depth that I know I need. The people here are the only ones I've found that consistently know the answers, and more. Laurie seems to be a treasure in himself, and there are several others who are as good and in some cases better. My suggestion is to widen the topic and then try to revive the list. I would be willing to help by shilling for the list on other venues. Hope we can keep it going. Brad Hi Brad, I haven't been able to post to filmscanners recently because my return email address was refused. There is nothing wrong with the return address, so I'm not sure what the problem is. I've also tried to contact Tony Sleep (the owner of filmscanners) but that message is also returned. Would you please forward this to filmscanners for me? Thanks. I share your concerns about the group, Brad, and I certainly agree that the expertise here is unparalleled. I have been astounded at the responses from the experts on the list regarding the amount of time that these people have taken to help others. I believe that is part of the problem, however. Sooner or later you just can't keep doing it. New blood needs to take over, but it takes years to learn what the professionals on this list know. Widening the scope of filmscanners is not a bad idea, but that is up to Tony Sleep. I really miss the Epson inkjet group and would like that area added as well. I'd like to hear from Tony concerning his view of filmscanners and what he would like to do with it. Ed I wish we could rejuvenate the list, I learned more here as relates to all aspects of digital imaging including Photoshop processing and printing than I have found anywhere. The level of intelligence here has been several orders of magnitude above any other imaging list I¹ve been on. Perhaps if the list were generalized to ³digital image creation², letting it grow to include discussions of various software from Lasersoft and Vuescan through various programs like PS (I saw a note elsewhere that asserted that a Lasersoft product is better than PS I think that was what was claimed) through specific printing programs. There is too much knowledge represented by Laurie, Art, David Littleboy and many others (I even come up with some useful stuff now and then) to just let it go. I know that other lists exist, but the chaff is often so thick, and the wheat so sparse that I despair. That wasn¹t true here, even when the arguments re: dMax and # of bytes were going on. Even discussions of equipment I will never own (probably), like the Minolta scanners, were useful. Is something like this worth proposing further? Or am I missing something and it would be best to just let ³Scanners² die? It is my hope that by talking with a few folks, I might refine my idea and have a better chance of selling to whoever (I don¹t even know who runs this list I can be oblivious on occasion). Who should this suggestion go to, and how might it be modified to improve its chances of succeeding, first in being tried, and second in practice? If you think this useful to post to the list, please feel free to do
[filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
Laurie, Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing. We don't have to duplicate Phil Askey, but I would love to know what actual experience is with different digital cameras - is the canon Mark II really that good, on one hand. At the other end, is there a realistic alternative to Epson 2200 or 4000? What if one is willing to give up a little, then is there something (I doubt it, but...). I read statements that there are software packages that are superior - especially faster - than Photoshop, really? How about just Digital Imaging? Or Digital Imaging Techniques? Perhaps to broad, but many of the discussions here were that broad just 6 months ago. But I want to remember that this list belongs to Tony, and he has done a superior job of maintaining it. He has to be willing to have this change take place. If it is done well, it is conceivable that the list will mushroom and while I am willing to help in any way, I am in California... People who handle lists, like this one, well, are not common. I've been on and left other lists, they become time consuming without informing. The only other one I've stayed with is the Yahoo Yamaha FJ list. It too is well maintained and has drawn some real gurus - that is what makes it work. Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas, including actual practice - are still around. What do you think? Can it be done and be useful? I think so, but ultimately, I am not the one doing it. -- Brad Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming ... wow, what a ride! F.French On 8/9/04 15:28, Laurie Solomon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe, the name of the group should be changed to Image Capturing and Digitalization Techniques. :-) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I, for one, would hate to see this list go by the wayside. It has helped me make choices in a evolution of scanners and, as far as I know, scanners are still improving. Many of the members on this list, and they're too numerous to name, have been of invaluable assistance to me. I agree with Brad in that widening the the topic to be inclusive to digital photography. While I now use a digital camera regularly, I still shoot medium format film and all the image printing and distribution is in digital form. Other lists that are peculiar to a manufacturer are very limited in information and narrow in scope. Filmscanners has been by far the best information source I have found. I even ran across an old Bush Millimaki customer who also lives in my home town of Huntsville, Alabama. I know that quite literally thousands of individuals have been informed and assisted from this list. I will do all I can to help revive this list, Tony, from my area - just say the word. Please, keep up the good work, Jim Sims Brad Davis wrote: Tony, First, below is a note from Ed Lusby. I don't know what to make of his difficulties communicating, but I thought sending it along to you might be useful. Below Ed's note is something I wrote to John Mahany after he so kindly sent me the info re: cleaning an SS4000. I hate to see this list die, it has been too good to just let it disappear - especially when much of the expertise that is here (o0r was here) applies all along the process of digital photography. Other lists that are supposed to deal with various topics are usually too limited - either to a certain manufacturer, or software vendor, or the material they deal with lacks the depth that I know I need. The people here are the only ones I've found that consistently know the answers, and more. Laurie seems to be a treasure in himself, and there are several others who are as good and in some cases better. My suggestion is to widen the topic and then try to revive the list. I would be willing to help by shilling for the list on other venues. Hope we can keep it going. Brad Hi Brad, I haven't been able to post to filmscanners recently because my return email address was refused. There is nothing wrong with the return address, so I'm not sure what the problem is. I've also tried to contact Tony Sleep (the owner of filmscanners) but that message is also returned. Would you please forward this to filmscanners for me? Thanks. I share your concerns about the group, Brad, and I certainly agree that the expertise here is unparalleled. I have been astounded at the responses from the experts on the list regarding the amount of time that these people have taken to help others. I believe that is part of the problem, however. Sooner or later you just can't keep doing it. New blood needs to take over, but it takes years to learn
[filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
On 9/8/04 4:32 PM, Brad Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing. I have not been a conspicuous presence on this list, mostly lurking for a couple of years. I have learned a lot from the good people here, and perhaps contributed a few meager tidbits of info from my own experience. I hope the list does not die. But I want to voice a cautionary reaction to Brad's suggestion. For me, the best mailing lists are those that address a narrow topic, and stay focused on that topic. This means that I don't have to wade through a lot of articles to find the few that I want to read. Digital photography is a rather broad field, and could encompass scanning, digicams, photoediting, color management, printing, imaging for the web, business and employment issues, etc. Some of those subfields interest me, some do not. I would hate to see this group evolve into a high volume list covering a diffuse range of topics. I would rather subscribe to a small set of focused lists that cover the subfields I follow. That's what I am doing now. -- Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Revive this list?!
Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas, including actual practice - are still around. Flattery will get you everywhere you smooth talker you; but on these sorts of lists flattery will only get you in trouble. :-) First, I make no claims to being a guru of any sort. I have just been around for a while and been on many lists; thus, I am at best a compendium of the things that I picked up for being on all these lists for a while from others wiht not training, technical knowledge, and expertise than I. But I want to remember that this list belongs to Tony, and he has done a superior job of maintaining it. Second you are right it is Tony's list; and he is the one who has to decide if he wants to continue it, if he wants to expand its focus and how? What do you think? Can it be done and be useful? I think so, but ultimately, I am not the one doing it. I think that the traffic on the list has dwindled for a number of reasons. (1). Tony has given other interests and concerns of his priority over the list, which he has every right to do but which may have resulted in some neglect of list housekeeping operations. (2). Tony has had problems with servers and ISPs during the course of the list's history, which has resulted in the list being down or having problems on ocassion withthe consequence that subscribers may have thought that the list had gone defunct. (3). The amount of film scanning has decreased as more and more photographers have turned to digital cameras which has resulted in fewer persons being attracted to a group dedicated to the topic of film scanning alone. (4). Finally, many of the older subscribers to the list may have burned out or gotten tied of answering the same old qustions over and over, responding to the same old requests for information or problems over and over, or engaging in intermurial food fights which other list members (usually newcomers to the list) who regard the list not as an online community but as a technical assistance businesslike forum where everything needs to be on topic and fit their conception of what they thought the group was or should provide them. Keeping this in mind, I think that the group might survive if it expands it focus to include capturing images using both scanners and digital cameras; but expanding it to other areas of imaging that take place later in the wrokflow might make for to broad and unfocused a group, which would result in too diverse a subscriber base leading to much complaining and dissatisfaction. There are plenty of generic and specialty lists on the internet that cover those aspects of imaging and little need for another. However, if one were to expand the subject matter covered by the list to include capturing and digitalizing images with film scanners and digital camera, I would think that one would want to change the name to reflect the new scope of the list. I have no favorites when it comes to names for the newly expanded list. But wahtever scope and name is selected by Tony, the list will have to be promoted by Tony and subscribers alike on other related and tangential lists so that others will know about the change in the list's name and scope as well as about the existence of the list if one expects to generate new subscribers and expand the subscriber base. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Laurie, Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing. We don't have to duplicate Phil Askey, but I would love to know what actual experience is with different digital cameras - is the canon Mark II really that good, on one hand. At the other end, is there a realistic alternative to Epson 2200 or 4000? What if one is willing to give up a little, then is there something (I doubt it, but...). I read statements that there are software packages that are superior - especially faster - than Photoshop, really? How about just Digital Imaging? Or Digital Imaging Techniques? Perhaps to broad, but many of the discussions here were that broad just 6 months ago. But I want to remember that this list belongs to Tony, and he has done a superior job of maintaining it. He has to be willing to have this change take place. If it is done well, it is conceivable that the list will mushroom and while I am willing to help in any way, I am in California... People who handle lists, like this one, well, are not common. I've been on and left other lists, they become time consuming without informing. The only other one I've stayed with is the Yahoo Yamaha FJ list. It too is well maintained and has drawn some real gurus - that is what makes it work. Laurie, you are one of the gurus here, and I hope that the rest of them - there must be nearly a dozen real experts in various areas, including actual practice - are still around. What do you
[filmscanners] Re: Revive this list?!
Jules, Actually, that makes sense to me too - would you suggest what we might address best here? Scanners seem about done as a topic - they'll be around for a while, but they are more like appliances than specialized equipment and a lot of the issues have been addressed. I would like to keep this group going as the expertise here seems to be better than most lists I am aware of. Perhaps some others have suggestions also. Brad On 8/9/04 19:53, Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/8/04 4:32 PM, Brad Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Were it up to me, and it isn't, so this is just a preference, I would have it cover digital photography from acquisition to printing. I have not been a conspicuous presence on this list, mostly lurking for a couple of years. I have learned a lot from the good people here, and perhaps contributed a few meager tidbits of info from my own experience. I hope the list does not die. But I want to voice a cautionary reaction to Brad's suggestion. For me, the best mailing lists are those that address a narrow topic, and stay focused on that topic. This means that I don't have to wade through a lot of articles to find the few that I want to read. Digital photography is a rather broad field, and could encompass scanning, digicams, photoediting, color management, printing, imaging for the web, business and employment issues, etc. Some of those subfields interest me, some do not. I would hate to see this group evolve into a high volume list covering a diffuse range of topics. I would rather subscribe to a small set of focused lists that cover the subfields I follow. That's what I am doing now. -- Julian Vrieslander [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- 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
