Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Epson 3200 scan: Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed or the hapless F-3200 4x5 film scanner? Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed Cheers, Dave On 1/6/07, Ralf R. Radermacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Epson 3200 scan: Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed or the hapless F-3200 4x5 film scanner? Ralf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed I see. Had one of those for a few years and it took the introduction of the V700 to make me part with it. In the menatime I had tried the 4870, 4990, and the Canon 9900 (?) and the improvement was just too marginal. To make the 3200 really shine, use it with Vuescan and set number of samples to 8. You won't believe your eyes. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
I have a V700 and its quite good with xpan negs and 6x6, better than the 4870 we have at work. If Paul wants to send me a neg and i can scan it. Regards, Paul On 06/01/2007, at 5:36 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 06/01/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul A good result and as you say, not surprising, I'd be keen to see where the Epson V700/750 fits in there. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
It's the Perfection 3200 flatbed, which has served me very well. But perhaps not as well as I once thought :-). Paul On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:11 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Epson 3200 scan: Which Epson 3200 is this? The Perfection 3200 flatbed or the hapless F-3200 4x5 film scanner? Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Thanks Ralf. I'll try that. Paul On Jan 6, 2007, at 5:57 AM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Epson Perfection 3200 flatbed I see. Had one of those for a few years and it took the introduction of the V700 to make me part with it. In the menatime I had tried the 4870, 4990, and the Canon 9900 (?) and the improvement was just too marginal. To make the 3200 really shine, use it with Vuescan and set number of samples to 8. You won't believe your eyes. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Yes, I'd like to see how the new Epson performs on this as well. I notice the Imacon was able to separate the green of the trees from the blue fog while the Epson 3200 was not. Perhaps I can find someone locally who owns the V700 or maybe a store will let me do a test scan. Paul On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:36 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 06/01/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul A good result and as you say, not surprising, I'd be keen to see where the Epson V700/750 fits in there. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Quite a noticeable difference - beautiful morning light behind the vehicles BTW. I use an Epson 3200 for my medium format scans. I'm not surprised at the difference - I found it to be iffy for high quality scans from slide film, but then slide film is the most demanding for scanning. I think the 3200 does a better job with negative film, especially BW. I did a head to head comparison of some 35mm BW frame between my Canoscan FS4000 and the Epson 3200, and found the difference to be negligible. I've also had several large (30 x 24) BW prints made from scans off the Epson that just scream with detail. Color negative film also scans well on the Epson - better than color transparency - but unfortunately my Epson has developed a problem with putting a blue line into every color scan at exactly the same place. Well, it's getting old. I keep watching for a good deal on a Nikon medium format scanner as a reasonable compromise between the flatbeds and the Imacons. It's really hard to sink a lot of money into a technology that's on the wane - I can see even my MF film days coming to a close. - MCC Paul Stenquist wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
I'm somewhat amazed at the difference in the background trees yet the subject cars don't appear different to me. I'd really like to see the Imacon compared to the large format Nikon scanner Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Imacon vs. Epson 3200 Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Yes, the cars are very similar, although there's some better detail in the grille and badges on the Imacon scan. The real different seems to be in color gradation. The Imacon distinguished the green of the trees from the blue of the fog much more accurately than the Epson. Paul On Jan 6, 2007, at 1:36 PM, Kenneth Waller wrote: I'm somewhat amazed at the difference in the background trees yet the subject cars don't appear different to me. I'd really like to see the Imacon compared to the large format Nikon scanner Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Imacon vs. Epson 3200 Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
On Jan 6, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Mark Cassino wrote: ... It's really hard to sink a lot of money into a technology that's on the wane - I can see even my MF film days coming to a close. My own reluctance as well. My MF film days are pretty much confined to hobbying now. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Yeah, that's where I'm at. I was shooting almost all MF (with a few diversions to my Leica) when digital rolled around. I had been looking for a high level scanner. I'm not looking very hard now. But I am hanging onto my 6x7 lenses in anticipation fo the 645D. Paul On Jan 6, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Jan 6, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Mark Cassino wrote: ... It's really hard to sink a lot of money into a technology that's on the wane - I can see even my MF film days coming to a close. My own reluctance as well. My MF film days are pretty much confined to hobbying now. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
On Jan 7, 2007, at 5:22 AM, Mark Cassino wrote: but unfortunately my Epson has developed a problem with putting a blue line into every color scan at exactly the same place. Well, it's getting old. My guess would be dust on the sensor, unless it's developed a dead/ hot pixel. - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
On 07/01/07, David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 7, 2007, at 5:22 AM, Mark Cassino wrote: but unfortunately my Epson has developed a problem with putting a blue line into every color scan at exactly the same place. Well, it's getting old. My guess would be dust on the sensor, unless it's developed a dead/ hot pixel. Often the mirror in the scanner head directly below the subject plane gets covered in crap, a clean can remedy duct problems and restore contrast. Though in this case it could be dust on the sensor or worse a stuck pixel. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
The detail sharpness everywhere is improved :-) As you say, not surprising, but the 3200 for what it cost does an OK job. Cheers, Dave On 1/6/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
Yes, you're righjt, David. The 3200 is good enough for many things. I use it to scan pics for stock and magazine articles, and everyone is happy with the results. In only in comparison that it suffers. But don't we all:-). Paul On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:05 PM, David Savage wrote: The detail sharpness everywhere is improved :-) As you say, not surprising, but the 3200 for what it cost does an OK job. Cheers, Dave On 1/6/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Imacon vs. Epson 3200
On 06/01/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's a pic I rescanned on my friend's Imacon. I treated it somewhat differently as well, both in terms of the crop and the rendering, but I still think there's a distinct difference. Note the detail in the background trtees. The imacon scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5416945size=lg The Epson 3200 scan: http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=2609820size=lg No surprise, but mildly interesting perhaps. Paul A good result and as you say, not surprising, I'd be keen to see where the Epson V700/750 fits in there. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
