ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??



Nope... It is bundled with some scanners, and will probably be with the NEW
Nikons and Minoltas, but my Elite has ICE and IR, but no GEM or ROC

Mike Moore

IronWorks wrote:

> Isn't ICE (and GEM and ROC?) already bundled with the only scanners that
> have the IR channel necessary for their use?
>
> Maris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Moore" <miguelmas@qwest.net>
> To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 7:33 PM
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??
>
> | I don't know where these guys get the idea that everyone that uses a
> pro-sumer
> | (Minolta Elite, Nikon LS2000, etc.) is an amateur... I see a lot of pros
> buying
> | these to scan work to give clients... I've tried PhotoCD Master and Pro..
> | that's why I am scanning my own 35mm... To say that we don't need or can't
> use
> | ICE and any other time saver we can get is flat wrong.... I never did a
> get a
> | straight answer from Jack at ASF on why we can't buy GEM and ROC and
> upgrade
> | ICE... There is a BIG market out there for a good quality, reasonably
> priced
> | scanner that will meet pro needs.. I can't afford to buy an Imacon, or
> Scitex
> | or anything else that sets me back multiple thousands...
> |
> | Mike Moore
> |
> | Frank Paris wrote:
> |
> | > > output levels and therefore anything that slows down output is
> avoided.
> | > > The amateur, on the other hand, has rarely such a need and usually
> likes
> | > > their equipment to embrace as many functions as possible in a single
> | > > product.
> | > > This is seen as good value for money, which I would suggest is the
> case.
> | > > He is not likely to be selling his scans for profit and therefore
> | > > has little
> | > > need for high output of digitised images and is also not likely
> | > > to have any
> | > > time deadlines to meet.
> | > >
> | > > Richard Corbett
> | > >
> | >
> | > I think this is the wrong message to send to a representative of a
> | > filmscanner manufacturer. Amateurs most definitely want a system that
> saves
> | > time, the moreso the more they have lives outside filmscanning.
> | >
> | > Frank Paris
> | > marshalt@spiritone.com
> | > http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> |
> |
> |




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.