Michael Wilkinson wrote:
Most of us just ignored it !!!
: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Laurie
Solomon
: wrote:
:
: you are still more or less *c*nt* and can afford
:
: Eh!!!
:
: Brian Rumary, England
:
: http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
But he's a "virgin"
Laurie Solomon wrote:
I never intended to write anything of the sort. The computer skipped some
characters in transmitting the message. It should have read: "you are still
more or less current and can afford" Sorry about that.
Was that Freudian web-slip?
Art
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 3:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Laurie Solomon wrote:
I never intended to write anything of the sort. The computer skipped some
or another; but typically the errors are caught by the spell checker
before transmission.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 3:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 12:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
It's pretty much like buying a new car (which I just did 2 weeks ago). The
value drops by thousands the moment you drive it out the door. However, my
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Laurie Solomon
wrote:
you are still more or less *cunt* and can afford
Eh!!!
Brian Rumary, England
http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 3:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
real value?
snip!
I recently bought one of their so-called 1200dpi flatbed scanners, which had
worse image sharpness than the cheap 600dpi
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of B.Rumary
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 6:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Laurie Solomon
wrote:
you are still more or less *cunt* and can afford
Eh!!!
Brian Rumary, England
http://freespace.
Most of us just ignored it !!!
- Original Message -
From: "B.Rumary" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Laurie
Solomon
: wrote:
:
: you are still mo
Epson tries to walk a fine line on this matter. One the one hand, they
are absolutely within their rights to refuse service, or charge for
service for any printer returned during warranty which has head problems
which could be related to the ink used, and in fact, I would go as far
as saying
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Derek Clarke)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001, 4:00 AM
There are a load of large format Stylus Pro models that appear to use the
same ink technology as the 2000P and therefore might have
Hi Art.
Arthur Entlich wrote:
Epson tries to walk a fine line on this matter. One the one hand, they
are absolutely within their rights to refuse service, or charge for
service for any printer returned during warranty which has head problems
which could be related to the ink used, and in
We seem to be misunderstanding one another. I have an 860, and am quite
happy with it. I expect to be concerned about longevity in due course. I
believe my printer will take unchipped archival pigmented ink cartridges
from 3rd party sources. It is also my understanding that those sources will
"Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do not void your warranty by using third party inks in an
Epson. If you need to return the printer for servicing, just remove
the CIS and re-install the Epson cartridges. See the Inkjetmall web
site (Cone Peizography, eg) for a discussion of
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for clearing away the fog, so to speak! What you say certainly
sounds logical to my unscientific mind. Gives me something more to think
about. It's looking like I'll have to wait a few more years, if possible,
before a good archival
]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, when
something better comes along my 2000P will be up for sale. I'll
let you know
in a hundred years how the prints are holding up
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 4:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Does anyone else think that Epson are producing new printers too
rs: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 4:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Does anyone else think that Epson are
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
real value?
We seem to be misunderstanding one another. I have an 860, and am quite
happy with it. I expect to be concerned about longevity in due course. I
believe my printer will take unchipped archival pigmented ink
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 2:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
real value?
"Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do not void you
D]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 2:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
real value?
"Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You do not void your warranty by us
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 4:15 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Does anyone else think that Epson are producing new printers too
fast now?
Hmmm. That's
A: EPSON does not recommend refilling or using 3rd party ink
cartridges. Using these products will not void the Epson
warranty, however, if these products cause a failure, the
repair of that failure will not be covered under warranty. "
Which is essentially what I wrote below - any problem
r warranty.")
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Woodworth
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 6:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000
real value?
Here is a quote from the FAQ's sec
8:30 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Frank Paris wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does anyone else think that Epson are producing new printers too
fast now?
Meanwhile, Epson printers are good enough
filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001, 12:00 AM
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for clearing away the fog, so to speak! What you say certainly
sounds logical to my unscientific mind. Gives me something more to think
about. It's
Clarke)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sun, Jan 28, 2001, 4:00 AM
There are a load of large format Stylus Pro models that appear to use the
same ink technology as the 2000P and therefore might have the same
longevity, but i can't remember
Brian:
Frankly, that's a wrinkle I hadn't thought of -- using other than
proprietary inks. I'll check out the sites. Thanks!
Hart Corbett
--
From: "B.Rumary" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Fri, Jan 2
aghty" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001, 5:46 AM
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) My question pertains to BW archival printing; apparently, the 2000P
can't even do
"Hersch Nitikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the 860/1160 with 3rd party archival inks? Aren't they much
less
costly than the 2000P? Or, what am I missing?
Rob wrote:
AFAIK the 2000P is the *only* printer Epson make with OEM pigment
based inks
Note "OEM" above. Yes, you can get 3rd
Rob:
You do not void your warranty by using third party inks in an
Epson. If you need to return the printer for servicing, just remove
the CIS and re-install the Epson cartridges. See the Inkjetmall web
site (Cone Peizography, eg) for a discussion of this. We have been
back and forth on that
Canon FS2710 to 1160 looks fine Rob.
Geoff Murray
www.geoffmurray.com
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Geraghty" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 1:45 AM
Subject: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
"
without
filling the room!
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Laurie Solomon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sat, Jan 27, 2001, 8:26 AM
All dye based inks fade given the right conditions - time and lighting among
othe
The Epson 7000, 7500 and 9000 all use archival inks and all claim 100 to 200
years, per the Epson site [sprinkle on as much salt as you think is
appropriate!!]
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Rob Geraghty" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS
ROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Thu, Jan 25, 2001, 11:29 AM
IMO we need to take ALL claims in sales literature with at least a couple of
pounds (or kilos) of salt, not just a grain or two. Yes, the qualifiers
such as "be
Robert Kehl wrote:
I believe the 5500 claims 200yrs light fastness.
But how 'bout the new 1290, 2880dpi, 4pl with 20yrs lightfastness!
BK
That makes a lot more sense... that would be the 2000P technology being
used in the 5500. Being that the 7500 wide carriage is a 7000 with new
Robert Kehl wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote
Rob Geraghty wrote:
"Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I realize this thread is somewhat off topic, but I have yet to see any
samples of 2880 dpi Epson output at any store. Is there really any
improvement over the 1440 dpi output? Does anyone know if the banding
is lessened
Frank Paris wrote:
That's a long way from 100 years, though, claimed for the 2000P. I
suppose
that's next, though: 2880dppi, 100 years.
Frank Paris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
Epson tends to introduce their newer technologies in their
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Epson 7000, 7500 and 9000 all use archival inks and all claim 100 to
200
years, per the Epson site [sprinkle on as much salt as you think is
appropriate!!]
Pardon me. I should have said the only one in the realms of a dekstop
printer
In a message dated 01/26/2001 8:46:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You might want to look at an Epson 760 (I'd have said 1160 except you
said no larger than 8x10) with the Cone Piezography system. The 760
seems unbelievably cheap at the moment in the USA so it would
Hello,
Why not the 860 (the smaller version of the 1160)? Does up to 8x10;
It can be had for about $125.00 less a $50 rebate from Epson (total
@ $75). Free shipping might also be available if you look around.
Try a coupon from:
http://www.techbargains.com/coupons.cfm
Robert DeCandido
://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hart or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 1:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
The Epson 7000, 7500
In 001d01c0879f$04737840$cec90fd2@phoenix, Rob Geraghty wrote:
Pardon me. I should have said the only one in the realms of a dekstop
printer
category that someone might buy for home studio use. The 7000 and up
printers
are all *big* printers intended for professional print-shop use. And
"Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not the 860 (the smaller version of the 1160)?
I don't think the 860 and 1160 print heads are identical. I'm pretty
sure that the 760 is the smaller version of the 1160. The 860 has
more black jets so it prints plain text faster. Either the 760
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Fri, Jan 26, 2001, 5:46 AM
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(1) My question pertains to BW archival printing; apparently, the 2000P
can't even do that. Is there any printer out there which
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, when
something better comes along my 2000P will be up for sale. I'll let you know
in a hundred years how the prints are holding up.
Perhaps you shouldn't have tempted fate. New Epson : Stylus Pro 5500,
I realize this thread is somewhat off topic, but I have yet to see any
samples of 2880 dpi Epson output at any store. Is there really any
improvement over the 1440 dpi output? Does anyone know if the banding
is lessened or increased with this "higher res" printing?
Art
Rob Geraghty wrote:
Tony Sleep wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, when
something better comes along my 2000P will be up for sale. I'll let you know
in a hundred years how the prints are holding up.
Perhaps you shouldn't have tempted fate. New
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
However, when
something
Sleep
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, when
something better comes along my 2000P will be up for sale. I'll
let
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
However, when
something better
e: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:40 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL
y, January 25, 2001 11:40 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
"Lightfastness' maybe; but what about "gasfastness" or "ozonefastness?"
Afterall, it was not the lack of lightfastness that caused the orange fade
in the 1270 case and usually within a pe
Tony:
That's sure a long ways from the 100 to 200 years longevity that Epson was
caliming on its Web site for it printers from the 2000P on up!
Hart Corbett
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tony Sleep)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Wed
: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
IMO we need to take ALL claims in sales literature with at least a couple of
pounds (or kilos) of salt, not just a grain or two. Yes, the qualifiers
such as "behind glass" and of course the kind of temperature and humidity
that is only found i
"Hart or Mary Jo Corbett" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's sure a long ways from the 100 to 200 years longevity that Epson was
caliming on its Web site for it printers from the 2000P on up!
Presumably the new printer doesn't use pigment based inks. AFAIK the 2000P
is the *only* printer Epson
"Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I realize this thread is somewhat off topic, but I have yet to see any
samples of 2880 dpi Epson output at any store. Is there really any
improvement over the 1440 dpi output? Does anyone know if the banding
is lessened or increased with this
Frank wrote:
Epson claims this was a bad batch of paper. It has been recalled
and replaced with paper that doesn't have these defects, so
you're thrusting at windmills.
This whole issue or orange fade has been discussed ad infinitum
on the Epson list, and a whole new discussion group was set
The voice of experience, I think! Once again, thanks very much!
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Laurie Solomon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Tue, Jan 23, 2001, 7:56 AM
You need this info..
The Epson x7
focus look to it with slightly hard edges, which somehow
didn't look bad for a portrait.
Depends on your POV.
Robert Kehl wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 a
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:26 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Rob
PS I'm glad to hear you're happy with the 2000P, Frank, since
it seems to have received
: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Spencer:
Very hasty*, but the results were so surprising I couldn't help
myself. The picture has a helicopter in it and I have been using it
to evaluate the resolution of my scanners. There is some numbering on
the side of the helicopter that is very
- Original Message -
From: shAf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 2:17 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Everytime I make such a purchase I predict such innovations. For
example, the SS4000 was available when I
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hart or Mary Jo
Corbett
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Epson does seem to be the only manufacturer that has focussed on the
longevity/archivability question and that's what attacts
Spencer:
Last night I tried printing the helicopter picture at a higher
resolution. The highest I could get with out resampling was 360 dpi.
The print was a lot closer to the Fuji 370 print then before. In fact
the print and the scan(Minolta Elite) looked quite similar now. So my
original
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ray Amos
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 5:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Laurie Solomon wrote
I am very pleased with the scanner in terms of the sharpness of 8x12 images.
With the use of Photoshop and good sharpening technique, the 11x14 and 11x16
images are acceptable. The Fujix Pictrograph prints compare very well to
optical enlargements.
Once past that size, the limiting factor is
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Laurie Solomon
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 7:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
It is my understanding that ... the color of the [Epson 2000P
Bob:
I had an interesting experience the other day. I had a 35mm slide
printed(8x10) by the Fuji Frontier 370 system. The Fuji system is
apparently 5000 dpi and uses a laser to expose Fuji Crystal paper
which is then chemically developed. The Fuji print was noticeably
sharper(by unaided eye)
, January 22, 2001 6:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Frank Paris wrote:
[snip] The film holder isn't flimsy, but it takes some
persistence to learn to live with it,[snip]
I find the film strip holder very fiddly and inconvenient
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sat, Jan 20, 2001, 11:27 AM
The pathetically flimsy plastic film/slide holders on my
SS4000 are a major reason that I'm real interested
in a new Nikon scanner.
I'm praying that Polaroid will improve the
Ray,
Were you able to compare a 2880 scan printed with the Fuji system? The
conclusion you draw seems to be a bit hasty. : )
Spencer Stone
Bob:
I had an interesting experience the other day. I had a 35mm slide
printed(8x10) by the Fuji Frontier 370 system. The Fuji system is
apparently 5000
I must admit I'm biased because I work for Applied Science Fiction, but I
wouldn't consider a scanner unless it has Digital ICE. Try as I can, I can't
get all of the dust off of an undamaged negative. Plus, many of the images I
scan have defects, some in manufacturing others in handling, that
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 07:24:07 -0700 Ray McGuinness ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
This leads me to conclude that the printer is
the main limiting device with a 2880 dpi scan at 8x10. When Epson
releases a 1 picoliter printer the 4000 dpi scanners will be a
necessity for producing the
rs: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sun, Jan 21, 2001, 10:08 PM
There is nothing pathetically flimsy about either one. There are no problems
associated with the slide holder, at least that have ever bothered me. I
liked it from the start. The film holder isn't flimsy, but it takes some
p
Bob writes ...
...
..., I am a sound image technology consultant by
trade and so I cannot resist having the latest and
greatest technology. ...
With the advent of the Nikon LS-40 (Coolscan IV) at it
seems my LS-2000 has really got to lose value.
...
Anyway, it seems to me that my
Spencer:
Very hasty*, but the results were so surprising I couldn't help
myself. The picture has a helicopter in it and I have been using it
to evaluate the resolution of my scanners. There is some numbering on
the side of the helicopter that is very easy to read on the
transparency
Tony;
The Fuji 370 print prompted me to do some experimenting with the
Epson 1270 printer settings. I found out the the dither patterns in
the monotone areas of the print were much smoother when using High
Quality(mono directional) then when using Bidirectional
printing(Faster). I only could
]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Frank all else who repled to my inquiry:
thanks very much for the quick replies and good info. I think I'll take
Frank's approach and be determined that I'll master it!
Hart Corbett
--
From: "Frank Paris&qu
and LS-2000 real value?
I am considering the purchase of an SS4000; just how "pathetically flimsy"
are the film/slide holders?
Hart Corbett
--
From: JimD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Sat, Jan 20, 2001
Rob:
Yes the Fuji just paints light on the Fuji Crystal paper with a
laser. I guess I was just surprised at the quality of print available
at a local fast photo place for $6(8x10). On the other hand comparing
the two prints with eyeballs its hard to tell them apart with respect
to
, the longevity question is
quite important to me.
Hart Corbett
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Date: Mon, Jan 22, 2001, 1:50 PM
In a message dated 01/22/2001 1:35:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 14:15:47 -0600 Stan Schwartz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
An upside down shoe box with strategically located cutouts for the cables is
just perfect for this.
You can afford SHOES as well as photography? Some of you people just lack
committment!... G :)
Regards
Tony
On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 14:18:05 -0600 Robert Kehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Anyway, it seems to me that my LS-2000 just dropped in value to somewhere
around $600 but perhaps my 4000t (SS-4000) will hold its value a little
better, maybe somewhere around $1,200. Response would be appreciated.
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
It'll be very interesting to see how the Nikons perform, but I think we
have now
passed the p
It would be interesting to hear why people are upgrading to the new
scanners. What current problems are they trying to solve?
Byron
I bought Scanwit 2720S a couple of months ago as a learning tool figuring
that I would want to upgrade once I figure out what I need. I'm very happy
with the
- Original Message -
From: bjs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday,
- Original Message -
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
I consider the 2700ppi market a different one to the 4000ppi. The majority
of users
won't need the higher
Hart writes ...
I am considering the purchase of an SS4000; just how "pathetically
flimsy"
are the film/slide holders?
I can't speak for the Polaroid, but the Nikon film strip holder
hasn't changed since they introduced the LS-10 ... and it is my
preference for the LS-2000 because it
20, 2001 8:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Vuescan works better than Insight for me.
snip
Frank Paris wrote:
any case, I'm sticking with the SS4000, since in my naivety I
can't imagine
what could be improved. Software of course...
The pathetically flimsy plastic film/slide holders on my
SS4000 are a major reason that I'm real interested
in a new Nikon scanner.
I'm praying that Polaroid will improve the film/slide holders
as they attempt to compete with Nikon.
-JimD
At 09:09 AM 1/20/01 -0700, jimhayes wrote:
snip
An upside down shoe box with strategically located cutouts for the cables is
just perfect for this.
A dust cover would be nice. It's actually mandatory I think. I had one
custom
made for about $15; most people just make one out of foam-core or the like.
I
think throwing in a $15 dollar cover
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of JimD
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 11:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
The pathetically flimsy plastic film/slide holders
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Paris" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 12:37 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
I have no problem with the slide holder. What possible difference would it
make if it wer
- Original Message -
From: bjs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Paris" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
Bob,
I have one address for you: Ebay.com. I have seen scanners that are years
old on there go for ridiculous prices. Let the bidders establish the market
price; some of the items I have seen there are going for more than street
prices. I guess bidder mentality, or the water... Anyway, make
97 matches
Mail list logo
