Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
Leslie Green wrote: > Richard, > > Is the resolution we see exactly what the scanner gave > you? Seems pretty low, too digital. > > I loved #3. I'm into water and boats these days. > > Leslie > No the res is low for web speed and jpeg compression. I have posted 3b at 300 dpi http://www.p at ???/discussion/upload/images/rheather3b.jpg and 3c at 1200 dpi http://www.p at ???/discussion/upload/images/rheather3c.jpg They are also jpeg compressed. Full frame B&W 4x5 @1200 dpi is a 25mb file Richard Heather >
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
Richard, Is the resolution we see exactly what the scanner gave you? Seems pretty low, too digital. I loved #3. I'm into water and boats these days. Leslie --- Richard Heather wrote: > Hi. I just bought a UMAX 2200. It will sca 81/2x11 > prints or up to 4x5 > transparencies. Works good for B&W negs if they are > not too dense. > Doesnt really have the resolution for 35mm but 2 > 1/4x2 1/4 is pretty > good. It is supposed to do 42bit color and 12 bit > B&W but I havn't been > able to make mine work. > I just uploaded new images from my new Leonardo 3" > sacnned by the UMAX > http://www.p at ???/discussion/upload/images/. > Look for: > rheather1,2,3,4 > Richard Heather > > Jeff Dilcher wrote: > > > >Hello! > > > > > >I was thinking of upgrading my scanner, and was > > >hoping to get a unit that might be capable of > > >scanning 4x5 (b&w) negatives. Does such a thing > exist? > > >Are other people here scanning negatives to > > >create positive "prints" for web pages? > > > > ___ > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.p at ???/discussion/ > > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.p at ???/discussion/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] RE: Scanning Negatives
Is this the same thing as the Linotype Ultra Saphir II, or is it a newer model? - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 7:39 PM Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] RE: Scanning Negatives > New scanners with greater DMax are appearing all the time, but I recommend > the Linotype 1400. It now comes with both reflective and transparency > targets; the Linocolor software, while requiring some study, is excellent; > and Linotypes tech support is second to none. > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.p at ???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
The UMAX was selling for $169 at officemax, $149 at the UMAX website and $110-299 on C-net's comparison shopping page. I ordered (also $20 rebate) from Computers4SURE.com and received the scanner the next day! Also lots of software: Net Objects Fusion($299), Photoshop LE, OCR etc. If you need the software you can't beat the deal. Richard Heather "Lists (sldb)" wrote: > On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Richard Heather wrote: > > > Hi. I just bought a UMAX 2200. It will sca 81/2x11 prints or up to 4x5 > > transparencies. Works good for B&W negs if they are not too dense. > > Doesnt really have the resolution for 35mm but 2 1/4x2 1/4 is pretty > > good. It is supposed to do 42bit color and 12 bit B&W but I havn't been > > able to make mine work. > > I just uploaded new images from my new Leonardo 3" sacnned by the UMAX > > http://www.p at ???/discussion/upload/images/. > > Look for: > > rheather1,2,3,4 > > Richard Heather > > > > Also take a look at the Epson 1200up. It is also a > flatbed,81/2x11, and 1200X2400 optical resolution. It comes with a > transparency adapter that will do up to 4x5, and it lists for 299$ I just > put one out for my students,So far it looks good for 6x6 and up. > jeff > > ___ > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.p at ???/discussion/
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
I don't think any flatbed scanner is a good solution for scanning 35mm. It's just too big of a compromise. I thought one would be OK for scanning to web, but after using a 35mm film scanner, it's not adequate anymore. |-Original Message- |From: Colin Talcroft [mailto:ctalcr...@yahoo.com] |Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 12:46 AM |To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??????? |Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives | | |Just a word, for what it's worth, I said in an earlier |message that I had a Microtek Scanmaker 4 that I am |very happy with. I should point out that I started by |buying an inexpensive Umax scanner. I took that back |to the store the same day because it just wasn't |adequate for 35mm. I don't think this is a Umax issue, |its just that the machines in that price range are |limited, I feel. In my opinion, you would in the end |be much happier waiting and getting a better scanner |rather than being disappointed by an inexpensive one |that just doesn't match the performance of a stronger |machine. | |
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
> > Also take a look at the Epson 1200up. It is also a > flatbed,81/2x11, and 1200X2400 optical resolution. It comes with a > transparency adapter that will do up to 4x5, and it lists for 299$ I just > put one out for my students,So far it looks good for 6x6 and up. > jeff I also own a Epson 1200u, and have found it a very good scanner for the price. I haven't tried to scan 35mm but the results I have gotten on larger negs have been great. You can check out some of my lasted scans at: http://www.james.kellar.com/wille.jpg and http://www.james.kellar.com/wille.jpg. james
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
Just a word, for what it's worth, I said in an earlier message that I had a Microtek Scanmaker 4 that I am very happy with. I should point out that I started by buying an inexpensive Umax scanner. I took that back to the store the same day because it just wasn't adequate for 35mm. I don't think this is a Umax issue, its just that the machines in that price range are limited, I feel. In my opinion, you would in the end be much happier waiting and getting a better scanner rather than being disappointed by an inexpensive one that just doesn't match the performance of a stronger machine. Colin __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Re: Scanning Negatives
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Richard Heather wrote: > Hi. I just bought a UMAX 2200. It will sca 81/2x11 prints or up to 4x5 > transparencies. Works good for B&W negs if they are not too dense. > Doesnt really have the resolution for 35mm but 2 1/4x2 1/4 is pretty > good. It is supposed to do 42bit color and 12 bit B&W but I havn't been > able to make mine work. > I just uploaded new images from my new Leonardo 3" sacnned by the UMAX > http://www.p at ???/discussion/upload/images/. > Look for: > rheather1,2,3,4 > Richard Heather > Also take a look at the Epson 1200up. It is also a flatbed,81/2x11, and 1200X2400 optical resolution. It comes with a transparency adapter that will do up to 4x5, and it lists for 299$ I just put one out for my students,So far it looks good for 6x6 and up. jeff
RE: [pinhole-discussion] RE: Scanning Negatives
But it has more color neg film profiles than the s/w that came with my Polaroid Sprintscan 35+, which is a dedicated 35mm film scanner. As for the Agfa hardware, seems to be cruising along with no problems. |-Original Message- |From: pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? |[mailto:pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ???]On Behalf Of Jeff Spirer | | |Yes, but it would have been nice if they had provided a profile for their |own Ultra 50. I found the profiles useless because it's the only color |film I shoot. Until I ran into their lack of support, I found it odd that |they would include profiles for all their films except one. | | |
Re: [pinhole-discussion] RE: Scanning Negatives
New scanners with greater DMax are appearing all the time, but I recommend the Linotype 1400. It now comes with both reflective and transparency targets; the Linocolor software, while requiring some study, is excellent; and Linotypes tech support is second to none.
Re: [pinhole-discussion] RE: Scanning Negatives
At 08:50 PM 9/16/00, Michael Keller wrote: At the office I have the Agfa scanner Gregg mentioned, it's a Duoscan T1200. This isn't a bad scanner, but pray that you never need support from Agfa. They lost any possibility of future sales with their inability to provide me with even minimal support (that I ended up offering to pay for, and still didn't get) made me abandon the scanner. The s/w even has profiles for some color negs materials Yes, but it would have been nice if they had provided a profile for their own Ultra 50. I found the profiles useless because it's the only color film I shoot. Until I ran into their lack of support, I found it odd that they would include profiles for all their films except one. Jeff Spirer Photos: http://www.spirer.com One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
