RE: filmscanners: Kodak RFS3600 - max file sizes
At 3600 dpi full frame, I get a 51MB file... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 9:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: Kodak RFS3600 - max file sizes Just a quicky, what is the maximum TIFF file size 'IN PRACTICE' that can be obtained from this scanner (i.e. in practice can you scan the entire 24x36mm? I would not think so.) An online photo library - Alamy.com requires 48Mb files. Can this be done on this scanner?
RE: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long)
Jim please tell me you're kidding. ME was solid out of the box? I got a new computer last month with ME, and the thing never stopped crashing. I eventually just upgraded to Windows 2000, and things have been fine ever since. Now, I was reading a bulletin board at zdnet last night where people did nothing to bash MS left and right, and sing the praises of Unix. I know one thing- it's not perfect, but Windows brought computing into the everyday world, so normal people could use it, and not just programmers who worked hard to learn Unix or whatever else. Personally, having worked with a guy who LOVED Unix, I know that if it was a choice for me between Unix and nothing, nothing would be it. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 11:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long) I agree that there were issues with 95, 98, and 98SE but ME was rock solid right out of the box (purchased last September). There were issues with device drivers, and some products still do not have ME drivers, but the OS itself is rock stable - never a blue screen, ever. I believe, with the new driver architecture, Windows 2000, XP, and ME will be even better. I'm not a fan of Microsoft but I think their operating systems are starting to mature and I think that will help those of us who use graphics. Jim JimD wrote: I'm going to give it about 2 years to disgorge its bugs and then it may be fit for use. Microsoft's releases are akin to good wine, generally they benefit by being aged. -JimD It has a few innovations that I believe will make life a great deal better for a good many of us. Peer to peer communications, improved device interface, and better memory management, to name a few. Just hope it's not all Internet user friendly with frills for sending the kid's photos to grandma. I think getting away from the old VXD drivers and using the WDM (Windows Drive Managed) architecture is a definite plus Microsoft's Windows XP home page is at: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/default.asp Jim Dave
RE: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson
Well- Let me offer my tidbit of experience. A few years ago, I had an Epson Stylus Color IIs- not a great printer by any stretch, but at the time it was all I could afford. I upgraded my computer to Windows 98, and the printer would not work right any longer- printed the pages funny, weird characters, etc, and no amount of reinstalling software would help. Finally I called Epson (a long distance toll call). My tech couldn't figure out what was wrong and put me on hold to do research. I waited on hold for 45 minutes (long distance), and when he finally came back, I was told "We can't figure out why it's not working. We'd recommend buying a new printer." I was furious. Their drivers didn't work (I had downloaded the Windows 98 updates from their site), so I should go buy a new printer? Ok fine. I bought an HP. I currently own an HP 952 C, and it has given me great photo quality prints. I know the prints won't last 200 years, but, well, neither will I... so I don't care. The prints I do get look great. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Software City Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 12:29 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: Photo quality printers: Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson Being in the repair biz, I can only say we see lots more HP inkjets, then all the other brands combined (granted there are more HP's in circulation, but the numbers still seem disproportionate). HP does great lasers, but I'd never recommend an HP inkjet to a Customer. There's a lot of cheap plastic in them, at least on the lower end. Plus, there aren't any Continuous Inking Systems available for HP. One distinction between HP Epson others is the fact that the print head is built into the cartridge.I'd guess the theory is that you get a fresh head with each new cartridge, but I have to wonder about the head quality ongoing cost. (I believe there's a class action suit going on over this issue.) If you do some surfing of folks who are seriously into the digital darkroom, you never see a mention of HP: mostly Epson. Regards, Ken Jaskot - Original Message - From: "patton paul" [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was wondering if anybody could comment on the relative quality of Hewlett-Packard vs. Epson photo quality printers.
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan
Would someone in London PLEASE get Ed a Kodak RFS 3600 to play with??? I'd love to try the program... Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jules Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 3:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan - Original Message - From: "Rick Berk" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 10:35 PM Subject: filmscanners: Vuescan Hey Ed- I just got the Kodak RFS 3600, and was interested in giving Vuescan a try, but I went to the website and was hoping to see some screen shots or something... any chance you could add some? you don't need screenshots, vuescan is just a dialog box with a bunch of tabs. it doesn't look pretty. but that's okay because the scans do and that's what matters. i have officially and exclusively switched to vuescan as of monday (after a week of playing with it and reading this list feverishly) (i was using nikon scan before, i have a nikon ls2000). the results i'm getting are simply astounding. ~j
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan (for RFS 3600)
Great! I'll be looking forward to trying out whichever Vuescan version supports the scanner. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 4:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan In a message dated 3/12/2001 3:45:17 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Would someone in London PLEASE get Ed a Kodak RFS 3600 to play with? Someone in Hawaii loaned me one, and I should get it this week. Regards, Ed Hamrick
RE: filmscanners: Kodak RFS 3600
Hey Tony- Just started noticing this- but things that were posted a week ago seem to be showing up on list again... server problems? Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rick Berk Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 12:10 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: Kodak RFS 3600 Would the person who e-mailed me for my opinion of the Kodak RFS 3600 please e-mail me off list? I apologize- I had a system crash last week and lost everything, including your message asking about it. Thanks. Rick
RE: filmscanners: Puzzled about display resolution
Most web hosting companies can get stats from users of their websites. You can find out what browsers are most popular, resolution settings, among other things. For me, as a web designer, such stats help me to create websites that are more accessible to everyone. If I see everyone is using 1024x768 or higher, I can design for that. If I see that 80% of my viewers are at 800x600, then I must design to that size. Nobody likes to scroll horizontally, and the resolution stat from my web host is a huge help in keeping my site looking good at all resolutions and on all platforms and in all browsers. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 10:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Puzzled about display resolution Do you guys want to alienate all amateurs on this list? ;) Of course not. My visitor stats say that 80% of my visitors are using less than or equal to 1024x768. How do you know that is their display resolution, and not what their browser is set to? I don't know how you do what you claim, so I have no idea how you get that info. If my display information is being sent to someone, that would tick me off, because it's none of their business what my display settings are. What else gets sent?
filmscanners: Vuescan
Hey Ed- I just got the Kodak RFS 3600, and was interested in giving Vuescan a try, but I went to the website and was hoping to see some screen shots or something... any chance you could add some? I'd just like to know what I can expect... Also, does anyone have any experience using this combination? Thanks in advance... Rick
RE: filmscanners: Digital ICE 3
Hi All- I'm in the market to upgrade my scanner. I would like one with USB connectivity. A friend recommended I look at the Kodak RFS 3600. BH Photo lists it for $1100. Does anyone have any opinions on this scanner? Worth the money? Or would I be better off waiting for the Nikon Coolscan IV at $200 cheaper? I have searched all over the web, and can't find any reviews for the Kodak. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Rick Berk
