[rollei_list] Re: OT Re: Scanning 120 film

Neil -

I think your greatest limitation is the final low res display of web
and low res print. We are in agreement that many affordable flatbeds
are capable of producing high quality results for all but the most
demanding applications. It was this statement which led to my
confusion:

"As a publisher of technical materials, photography is
integral to my livelihood, and for much of this work, there is no choice
but to scan at the highest quality."

What aspect of your publishing requires scanning to the highest quality?

Regards,

Eric Goldstein

--

On 12/27/07, Neil Gould <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I'm not certain what the source of your confusion might be, as you have
> summed up the matter rather well. For reduced res print and web, several
> flatbed scanners will provide adequate results and a much faster workflow,
> which is what lead to my original statement about a user's needs being
> below the capabilities of a Nikon 8000/9000 or Microtek 120tf. So, I
> advocate that one select a scanner based on the requirements of the work
> to be done.
>
> Using dedicated film scanners is an unavoidably slow process compared to a
> flatbed and low resolution output. It makes little sense to me to spend
> that time and wind up with compromised results due to llimitations of
> methods such as scanning directly into Photoshop.
>
> Regards,
>
> Neil
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' 
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: