Re: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...

[Arthur Entlich <artistic@ampsc.com>]

If a $500 scanner can produce a scan which has no banding, I think a $3K
one should as well.

The expectation that a $3K scanner should work well enough to not
produce banding is, IMHO, not an unreasonable one.  Heck, I expect it of
a $500 one too.

Certainly, there are likely differences between products with an order
of magnitude price differential (I sure hope so, or someone is
overpaying by quite a bit), but I do not consider price as a valid
yardstick as to if something can be defective or not.

If I buy a disposable camera which sells for $10 and its sold for
underwater photography (yes, it might say "good to 10' deep) it
shouldn't fill with water when I use it in my swimming pool.

If I buy some CD-Rs which state on the outside of the package "lifetime
warranty", the inside cases shouldn't say "warranty against defects for
one year after purchase date" (as some Memorex CD-Rs I bought do.)

Now, it might not be worth my while to complain about the leaky camera,
but in principal, I certainly have every right to be displeased and to
ask for a replacement.

The attitude that if you don't buy the top of the line, I should
expect defective merchandise is pervasive, but illogical and plays right
into the hands of the manufacturers.  If on the first time my Honda
didn't start the dealer told me, "hey, what did you expect?, it's a
Honda, if your want a car that starts every time you should have bought
a BMW" that would be the last time I bought a Honda. 

Art

Lawrence Smith wrote:
> 
> I do that as well.  However, not all slides/negs need to be done that way.
> Clearly there is a point of diminishing returns.  BTW, I've had crappy drum
> scans too.  Really depends on the operator.  My point was that they need to
> be free of things like visible banding that make them look like striped
> wallpaper.  I run business, if I can save the $30 to $50 dollars per scan,
> why not do it?  Lawrence wonders why he detects a bit of an attitude in your
> reply.  I'm sure they are many others on this list whose work sells for as
> much or more than mine does.  If you doubt that I am being truthful, I'd be
> happy to send you to a location where you could buy one for yourself ;-)
> 
> Lawrence
> 
> > If your scans need to be perfect, why are you trying to scan them on a
> > $3,000 scanner?  Send them out to someone who has a high-end drum
> > scanner