Maybe its because Im from Sweden . I don't understand Mr. Corbets
replay!
It cant be so hard to build a scanner with depth of field who can take
care of a curved film or a better film holder.
Mikael Risedal
>From: "Dicky" <corbettr@dircon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Coolscan 4000ED Review
>Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 18:26:01 +0100
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Tony Sleep" <TonySleep@halftone.co.uk>
>To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 8:46 AM
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Coolscan 4000ED Review
>
>
> > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:33:24 Mikael Risedal (risedal@hotmail.com)
>wrote:
> >
> > > There is a problem with the film holders and flatness of the film. No
>film
> > > are exactly flat, and ED 4000 overall sharpness are not good
>because
>of
> > > curved film..
> >
> > The only scanners I have ever seen this problem on have been Nikons,
>unless
> > film is grossly curved. Even fixed focus scanners seem to cope. I think
>that
> > the relatively low brightness of Nikon's LED lightsource compels them to
>use a
> > much wider aperture than scanners using flourescents.
>
>
>You may say that, and indeed you "have" said that BUT, if a film is curved
>at the focal plane and the device involved in not constructed in such a way
>as to allow for that, then the least you can expect is image distortion.
>
>Come, come Mr Sleep, or should I call you Wayne, you will need to dance to
>another tune on that little issue.
>
>Richard Corbett - ballet lover.
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at .
