The cult membership is purely optional.
> I've bought neither, my comment about purchasing a Leica was a joke. I
> just don't think I could afford to belong to another cult :-)
>
> Art
>
> Austin Franklin wrote:
> >
> > > I have no comments of Leica rangefinders, other than that I've rarely
>
e-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 6:08 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
>
>
> It is probably the weak point in the process, but it was a
It is probably the weak point in the process, but it was a matter of
pragmatics.
I did try to minimize the "damage" by using a Navitar Gold lens, which
is one of the best there are for projection. Still, I would agree it
degraded the images. Trying to see a full image with a loupe,
especially w
I've bought neither, my comment about purchasing a Leica was a joke. I
just don't think I could afford to belong to another cult :-)
Art
Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> > I have no comments of Leica rangefinders, other than that I've rarely
> > gotten along well with anyone who tells me they own one
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001 11:16:45 +0200 Anthony Atkielski
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> I've considered it--but how would I get the pictures back and forth
> between the
> two machines? I'd need to buy a router, at the very least, so add a few
> hundred
> more dollars. And the machine would ne
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:39:19 +0200 Anthony Atkielski
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and some
> sample
> scans I've seen appear to support this. Specifically, it appears to
> have a
> smaller dynamic range.
Please read my reviews, i
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:02:47 +0200 Anthony Atkielski
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Either way your computer will be obsolete at some
> > point.
>
> Like my Leica M rangefinder, you mean?
Wrong end of the development curve, Anthony. Your wet-collodion field
camera, the one that needed a hors
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 11:43:16 +0200 Anthony Atkielski
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The Polaroid SS4000 has been suggested, so I
> am considering that, although I still have some questions about the
> dynamic
> range, and it is essential that this range be equal to or greater than
> the
> LS-2
> As I think I've posted before, I did a double blind shoot out with Leica
> and Nikon lenses (a 28mm 2.8 wide angle, a 135mm 2.8 tele and the 50mm
> 1.4 normal). Each image was shot with one of these three lenses with
> both the Leica and the Nikon, on Kodachrome 25.
>
> After the images were
> I have no comments of Leica rangefinders, other than that I've rarely
> gotten along well with anyone who tells me they own one ;-)
>
> Art
P.S. Either you don't get along with your self, or you bought an "R", not an
"M"?
No, I didn't, nor would I. I've yet to have a complaint by anyone about
my use of Nikon lenses.
As I think I've posted before, I did a double blind shoot out with Leica
and Nikon lenses (a 28mm 2.8 wide angle, a 135mm 2.8 tele and the 50mm
1.4 normal). Each image was shot with one of these thre
I somehow just knew that your response would not disappoint.
Goodby
Brad
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>
> Brad writes:
>
> > As taught in every law school, you've had a counter
> > argument for any and every point raised, without, as
> > I remember, ever r
> Re: filmscanners: Best film
> scanner, period!!!
I am scanning film for output as large images (30x40 & 40x50) on an Epson
1 printer. I wanted to purchase a Nikon 8000ed scanner. Dealers in the
US, that I have talked to would not quote a delivery date. In the same
price rang
Brad writes:
> As taught in every law school, you've had a counter
> argument for any and every point raised, without, as
> I remember, ever recognizing that there might be
> some validity to the point being made or, as I
> can remember, offering a thank you to those spending
> their time in tryi
Anthony,
You've immediately, stoutly and thoroughly discounted ALL of the
advice, suggestions and opinions you've recieved here from perhaps a
couple dozen people. For every point raised, you've dispatched it in
short order as not being helpfull for numerous reasons. As taught in
every law sc
> Please don't tell my wife! If she found out I bought a Leica she'd most
> certainly leave me!
Did you really buy a Leica? If so, congratulations! Gee, you'll now be
able to see just how good (or bad ;-) your scanner really is!
Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> > Sometimes, if we are very lucky, we find our soul mates!
> >
> > I hear wedding bells. ;-)
> >
> > Art
>
> Art,
>
> I am glad for you that luck has finally come your way!
>
> ;-)
Please don't tell my wife! If she found out I bought a Leica she'd most
certainly
>on 8/27/01 5:39 AM, Anthony Atkielski at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and some
>>sample
>> scans I've seen appear to support this. Specifically, it appears to have a
>> smaller dynamic range.
>
>I don't know where you've heard that,
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>
> You make the same mistake that many microcomputer companies make, including the
> big ones like Microsoft. Their employees have never dealt with true
> mission-critical systems, in the mainframe or NASA sense (for example),
Oh my god, we are dealing with rocket
> Sometimes, if we are very lucky, we find our soul mates!
>
> I hear wedding bells. ;-)
>
> Art
Art,
I am glad for you that luck has finally come your way!
;-)
oh dear, we are slipping downhill...:-)
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Woolfenden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
> I'm afraid that here
Sometimes, if we are very lucky, we find our soul mates!
I hear wedding bells. ;-)
Art
Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> > Austin writes:
> >
> > > You examined a 35mm slide on a light table
> > > and concluded that there are no blown highlights
> > > or blocked shadows on it?
> >
> > No, I saw detai
What the hell is it with Leica owners. I understand Paxil is effective
for obsessive-compulsive disorder. ;-)
Art
Austin Franklin wrote:
>
> > Hi Anthony,
> >
> > Good to see you on here. Presumably things will get a lot quieter on the
> > Leica list now...!?
> >
> > Tony, stand by for a lot mo
Austin writes:
> You SAID they were not missing on the slide,
> which is what I said, and you now deny.
Yes, I just said that I saw detail in highlights and/or shadows that did not
appear in the scan. Where is the problem?
> I will answer no more on this, I feel you are
> just playing games, a
I'm afraid that here in Oz the word wanker would be starting to be
uttered..
. like we do here about your Rugby team .
Springbok Steve
: "Winsor Crosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
> Apparently the list has been taken over by someone with a "problem"
> and not the one stated. He really does
> Austin writes:
>
> > You examined a 35mm slide on a light table
> > and concluded that there are no blown highlights
> > or blocked shadows on it?
>
> No, I saw detail in highlights and/or shadows that were missing
> on the scan.
You SAID they were not missing on the slide, which is what I said
on 8/27/01 3:55 PM, Anthony Atkielski at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Austin writes:
>
>> You examined a 35mm slide on a light table
>> and concluded that there are no blown highlights
>> or blocked shadows on it?
>
> No, I saw detail in highlights and/or shadows that were missing on the scan.
>
Arthur writes:
> I also "assume" Imacon offers much more customer
> support for that price (at least I would hope so!)
I doubt it. Usually in domains like that, customer support actually costs
_more_, not less. If they can soak customers for $10K for a scanner, they have
a captive market, and
i have had numerous conversations with nikon about the LS-4000. that scanner
is a very advanced scanner capable of doing fabulous things for the true
professional. the true professional needs an updated computer system designed
for photography and graphics use, not office. i have had to do signi
Austin writes:
> You examined a 35mm slide on a light table
> and concluded that there are no blown highlights
> or blocked shadows on it?
No, I saw detail in highlights and/or shadows that were missing on the scan.
> > > Your main machine then has two NICs including
> > > the one you already own.
> >
> > I have no more slots for another NIC.
> >
> >
> I think mentioning that all your slots were full at the beginning would
> have helped...
>
> Use the other machine as the Internet interface then.
Anothe
Moreno writes:
> If you consider a state-of-the-art $10k Intel-based
> workstation a desktop, then what is your old NT box?
> A peashooter?
It's not price, it's purpose.
> Personally, I don't know any photographers, scanner
> operators, or prepress houses that are running
> computers more than
> It's not obvious to me why configuring NT routing isn't exactly the same
> problem as configuring a bought-in router, just with different syntax.
A simple standalone router offers a few advantages; it's pretty much a plug
and play operation (for basic use), doesn't require any system overhead o
Austin asks:
> Specifically, where... as in what's the URL,
> what magazine?
I don't remember.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Atkielski) wrote:
>
> > Derek writes:
> >
> > > Your main machine then has two NICs including
> > > the one you already own.
> >
> > I have no more slots for another NIC.
> >
> >
> I think mentioning that all your slots were full at the beginning would
> have he
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Atkielski) wrote:
> Derek writes:
>
> > Your main machine then has two NICs including
> > the one you already own.
>
> I have no more slots for another NIC.
>
>
I think mentioning that all your slots were full at the beginning would
have helped...
Use the other ma
> Hi Anthony,
>
> Good to see you on here. Presumably things will get a lot quieter on the
> Leica list now...!?
>
> Tony, stand by for a lot more mail on this list now...
>
> :-)
>
> Tim A
Thanks, Tim...dawn breaks over marble head...I did not realize this Anthony
and "mxsmaniac", from the Leic
Gentlemen - please, some calm. I think (or hope) this thread has worked its
way through to an end.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Meier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Bes
It's not obvious to me why configuring NT routing isn't exactly the same
problem as configuring a bought-in router, just with different syntax.
NAT has some limits on what applications you can use on the Internet
connection, so it's not a no-brainer.
Also I'm trying to work within the budget e
Hi Anthony,
Good to see you on here. Presumably things will get a lot quieter on the
Leica list now...!?
Tony, stand by for a lot more mail on this list now...
:-)
Tim A
> Blown highlights and blocked shadows (I should never see both on
> a single scan,
> if the dynamic range is adequate), on a slide that contains neither when
> examined on a light table.
You examined a 35mm slide on a light table and concluded that there are no
blown highlights or blocked shado
Apparently the list has been taken over by someone with a "problem"
and not the one stated. He really does not want a solution to the
stated problem. He just wants you to talk and talk. About him.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
> > A large part of my business deals with 3D
> > animation, video editing, and pre-press graphics.
> > You may call these desktop systems, I call these
> > production systems.
>
> I call them desktop systems, within the context of this discussion.
If you consider a state-of-the-art $10k Intel-ba
> Rob asks:
>
> > Anthony, can I ask *where* you've "consistently heard"
> > this?
>
> Reviews on the Net and in magazines, and one or two sample scans
> I saw. The
> general opinion of the Nikon scanners seems to be consistently
> and significantly
> higher.
Specifically, where... as in wha
> The public has been very well brainwashed with respect to computer equipment.
> Not only do people not find it odd that they are expected to junk their
> computers every year or so and buy completely new hardware and software, but
> they've actually been convinced that this is the way things are
Robert writes:
> You have games installed on a mission-critical
> system??!!
Yes. I only have one system.
> A system that is so important that when it is
> out for a day or two would ruin your whole business?!!
Correct.
Does this surprise you? Games are just applications like any others.
It was an incidental observation.
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Meier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 18:29
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
>
> --- Anthony Atkiels
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>
> Pat writes:
>
> > Well, if ICE isn't a critical requirement, why
> > not look at the Polaroid (or the Canon, which
> > has an equivalent to ICE, and scans at 4000
> > dpi) which several people have suggested?
>
> Because I understand that it has less dynamic range
Johnny writes:
> The main one seems to be dust on the sensor.
Is all of the optical path readily accessible without disassembling the scanner,
as it is on the Nikon? On the LS-2000, I just brush dust off the mirror and
lens and everything is fine.
> The bundled Silverfast software is fine for
Rob asks:
> Anthony, can I ask *where* you've "consistently heard"
> this?
Reviews on the Net and in magazines, and one or two sample scans I saw. The
general opinion of the Nikon scanners seems to be consistently and significantly
higher.
Austin writes:
> Scanner testing is VERY operator dependant.
Well, if I could feel confident that the SS4000 would indeed give me at least
the same dynamic range plus the higher resolution, I might well spring for it.
How is the software included with it? (I'm mainly concerned about driver
stab
--- Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The VueScan documentation warns that it might not work very well on
> Polaroid
> scanners, though, as I recall.
According to previous messages from you it seems that you wouldn't have
time for multi scanning anyway. So why bother if it does or d
--- Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do have
> a few games installed, but they are about the only non-critical
> applications on
> the machine
You have games installed on a mission-critical system??!! A system that
is so important that when it is out for a day or two would ruin
Moreno Polloni wrote:
>
> > Not true in this case. Nikon simply decided to drop SCSI and Windows NT
> support
> > for their newer scanners. This was a marketing decision, not a technical
> > decision, and no technical advantage accrues from it.
>
> That's not true. How about plug and play? T
it works fine with some of that stuff as i have it but i am amassed that you
works with that stuff. what you need is a new computer and then eventually a
scanner.
on 8/27/01 5:39 AM, Anthony Atkielski at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and some sample
> scans I've seen appear to support this. Specifically, it appears to have a
> smaller dynamic range.
I don't know where you've heard that, Anthony,
"Anthony Atkielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and some
sample
> scans I've seen appear to support this. Specifically, it appears to have
a
> smaller dynamic range.
Anthony, can I ask *where* you've "consistently heard" this? What
"Anthony Atkielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The VueScan documentation warns that it might not work very well on
Polaroid
> scanners, though, as I recall.
I doubt that it would. The Polaroid has more dynamic range than the LS30
without
multiscanning. What I *don't* know is whether the SS400
> > Since you say it yourself that this is only the
> > *theoretical* dynamic range then why do you already
> > exclude the Polaroid without making any actual test.
>
> I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and
> some sample
> scans I've seen appear to support this. Speci
> windows 2000 professional addition is an undated
> version of windows nt and it works well.
Can you guarantee that every one of my applications will run on it without
change? How do I support my 1800 Type 1 fonts, for example? How does it handle
dongles? How well does it work with PPTP and D
> what do you do that you need all the applications
> and networking?
I try to earn a living, as opposed to just playing with the machine. I do have
a few games installed, but they are about the only non-critical applications on
the machine (and, ironically, they are the most likely to reinstall
Moreno writes:
> Yes there has. From Microsoft. Look it up yourself.
I can't look up what doesn't exist. Next time, verify that something really
exists before you assert that it is there.
Rob writes:
> I've done multipass scanning on the LS30
> without registration problems.
The VueScan documentation warns that it might not work very well on Polaroid
scanners, though, as I recall.
> But judging by Ed's comments about the long
> pass feature, I'd say that single pass
> multiscann
Robert writes:
> Since you say it yourself that this is only the
> *theoretical* dynamic range then why do you already
> exclude the Polaroid without making any actual test.
I've consistently heard that it isn't as good as the LS-2000, and some sample
scans I've seen appear to support this. Spe
> he certainly does not deleiver photos over
> internet as his system will not take a dsl line.
Even an old 386 will support DSL.
Karl writes:
> Their product lifecycle is five+ years. For NT 4.0
> they've also released the dates for
> this to happen:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle.asp
They've tried that before. They always end up supporting things beyond that
date, as large customers insist on it. Notice
ay, August 27, 2001 07:42
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
> Anthony Atkielski writes
>
> > Derek writes:
> >
> > > Your main machine then has two NICs including
> > > the one you already own.
> >
> > I have no more slots for
Jawed writes:
> Anthony, see my site with a few samples that
> show the LS40 with Nikon Scan 3.1 with "difficult"
> slides (Provia 100 F RDP3, Velvia). This
> combination never clips highlights and gets
> a lot out of the shadows with little noise.
I get my best results with my LS-2000 using Ni
Moreno writes:
> A large part of my business deals with 3D
> animation, video editing, and pre-press graphics.
> You may call these desktop systems, I call these
> production systems.
I call them desktop systems, within the context of this discussion.
> In the context of this scanner newsgroup,
windows 2000 professional addition is an undated version of windows nt and it
works well.
what do you do that you need all the applications and networking?
my new computer is just wonderful. it great to finally get into the modern
age. i have changed over my 20 programs and it is no big deal. the speed
saves so much time. mr underpowered computer mentioned he was having some
problems with things in his system not working well. he must be develop
Anthony Atkielski writes
> Derek writes:
>
> > Your main machine then has two NICs including
> > the one you already own.
>
> I have no more slots for another NIC.
Anthony, think about putting the two NICs in the new PC -- current versions of
Windows do Internet Connection Sharing (not to mentio
Talk about 'Mission-critical', I was involved with the
preliminary design competition phase of the Space Shuttle. NASA had a
criterion for the design of the Shuttle systems. It was, as best I
remember it: Fail Operational, Fail Operational, Fail Safe.
That meant that after two independent failur
Anthony wrote:
>No, mainly because of the problems with misregistration of pixels.
>Additionally, the gain would be very small compared to the overhead of
scanning
>twice. It already takes me from 3-10 minutes per slide, for the scan and
>Photoshop adjustments.
I've done multipass scanning on th
> > I'm quite amused at your assertions at who my
> > customers are.
>
> All you've described thus far is desktop users, and desktop systems are
not
> production systems in any mission-critical sense. The company will not
fail
> because a desktop computer isn't working.
>
> > Most of them are ind
se Vuescan's
settings - so I apologise for the "introductory" nature of the tests.
Jawed
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Anthony Atkielski
> Sent: 26 August 2001 10:30
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > If you want to learn more about Microsoft's announcement
> > to discontinue NT support ...
>
> There has been no such announcement.
Yes there has. From Microsoft. Look it up yourself.
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 01:51:13AM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
[ ... ]
>
> > If you want to learn more about Microsoft's announcement
> > to discontinue NT support ...
>
> There has been no such announcement.
Actually they have an implicit announcement with the release
of every new version
Derek writes:
> Have you tried artificially extending the dynamic
> range by scanning each slide with two different
> exposures and combining the results?
No, mainly because of the problems with misregistration of pixels.
Additionally, the gain would be very small compared to the overhead of sca
> It's not good to bring an always-on Internet connection straight onto an
> internal LAN, you need something running firewall software in the way.
I'd normally suggest a router doing NAT, plus firewall software on each PC,
but I believe there were some price objections somewhere along the way.
Have you tried artificially extending the dynamic range by scanning each
slide with two different exposures and combining the results?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Atkielski) wrote:
> Mike writes:
>
> > Is this true?
>
> That has been my understanding from reviews I've read.
>
> > I was under
> The ones you deal with are not using systems in a production environment.
> Nobody who depends on a computer for survival can afford to idle it for
weeks at
> a time, any more than he can afford to run his business without
electricity.
I'm quite amused at your assertions at who my customers are
That's not so hot an idea.
It's not good to bring an always-on Internet connection straight onto an
internal LAN, you need something running firewall software in the way.
Two NICs in the main machine is the way to go.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Moreno Polloni) wrote:
> > > No, just two 100MBit netwo
Your main machine then has two NICs including the one you already own.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Anthony Atkielski) wrote:
> Karl writes:
>
> > No, just two 100MBit network cards ($10 a piece)
> > and a cross over cable.
>
> And what do I do with my Internet connection?
>
>
Moreno writes:
> I rarely reboot either, but I turn my scanner
> off when I'm not using it.
As long as it's on when you boot, you can thereafter turn it off or on whenever
you want. That's what I do.
> If I want to unplug the scanner and bring it over
> to another PC, I can do that too, all wi
> Austin writes:
>
> > Have you measured your transparencies to see
> > exactly what you are achieving for density
> > ratio numbers?
>
> No. How would I measure it? Don't I need fancy equipment for that?
Pretty simply actually. Take a particular type of film you are using.
Unroll a part of it
> > And firewire, unlike SCSI, doesn't require your
> > devices to be powered on at boot time.
>
> Not a big issue for me, as I always turn everything on on those very rare
> occasions when I boot, anyway.
Other people have different work habits. I rarely reboot either, but I turn
my scanner off
, 2001 5:39 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best film scanner, period!!!
> Karl writes:
>
> > No, just two 100MBit network cards ($10 a piece)
> > and a cross over cable.
>
> And what do I do with my Internet connection?
___
Austin writes:
> Have you measured your transparencies to see
> exactly what you are achieving for density
> ratio numbers?
No. How would I measure it? Don't I need fancy equipment for that?
> > No, just two 100MBit network cards ($10 a piece)
> > and a cross over cable.
>
> And what do I do with my Internet connection?
Perhaps you can buy a $25 hub and save the $5 cost of a crossover cable.
Rob writes:
> You can't upgrade.
The only upgrade that might interest me is to a LS-4000, and that is not
possible. The rest is fine.
> I thought you already had an LS2000?
I do. But you mentioned an LS-30.
> > I don't mean this to come across snide, but do
> > you actually know what a density range of 0-3.4
> > means?
>
> Yes. It means 12-bit output,
It does not necessarily mean a 12 bit output...
> which gives a _theoretical_ dynamic range of
> 4096:1, or log(4096)=3.6, for density range. (A r
> > And unless you scan color positives, you won't
> > even approach the dynamic range that most any
> > scanner has to offer.
>
> Unfortunately, color transparencies are about all I scan, so I
> need the largest
> dynamic range I can get.
Understood. Have you measured your transparencies to see
wow, i just hitched up my new computer and ls-4000 scanner and it's amasing.it did not
take that long to convert my lots of programs anf i wish i had done it before. it's a
necessary part of being a professional photographer.
Karl writes:
> No, just two 100MBit network cards ($10 a piece)
> and a cross over cable.
And what do I do with my Internet connection?
"Anthony Atkielski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So you're painted yourself into a corner again.
> How so? Everything works for me.
You can't upgrade.
> I was thinking of the LS-2000, not the LS-30. The hardware is identical,
of
> course, but the firmware is crippled in the LS-30, and one of
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 06:43:07PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> > Or you could spend less than $1000 on a completely
> > new computer with not much CPU but lots of RAM
> > and a Firewire card to use as a dedicated
> > scanning station.
>
> That would be the most practical solution, but that
Rob writes:
> So you're painted yourself into a corner again.
How so? Everything works for me.
> =8^o I've heard quite the opposite. I have an
> LS30 but if I could have justified the cost, I'd
> have bought a SS4000.
I was thinking of the LS-2000, not the LS-30. The hardware is identical,
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
