- Original Message -
From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand
transparencies to scan...
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 06:40:38 -0500 Tom Scales ([EMAIL PROTECTE
I hate to recomend the old Nikon LS3510AF to anybody, because it's
really a terrible scanner from the dark days. But you can live with some
reduced image quality. They used to cost about $5000, but you can get
them in good shape for under $300 US now. Shows how worthless they are
in these
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 06:40:38 -0500 Tom Scales ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with the
optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time.
Doubtful - it will be extremely slow compared to bulk scanning stations
which process
On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 12:55:37 +0400 Jeremy Nicholl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a
final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to
you, so money is no object.
I suggest you look at pro-lab-type scanning
To heck with the slides and the scanner ;-) Thanks to dearly departed
rich Uncle Charlie, I'm living in the Bahamas on my yacht, drinking
coconut daiquiris, and I've hired someone else to scan the thousands of
slides and figure out which scanner (s)he needs to do it.
;-)
Art
Jeremy Nicholl
Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with the
optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time.
Tom
You want the best possible quality.
However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make
minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to
I reserve judgement on that one!
Previous Nikon bulk slide feeders have been notorious for jamming.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Scales) wrote:
Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with the
optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time.
Tom
You want
with than scanners and scanning. :-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 8:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand
transparencies
