Multi-pass.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------
respond to bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Perez" <patdperez@yahoo.com>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Scanning 4x5 under $500 US?
> Is the Vuescan multi sample scanning on the Epson multiple pass or single
> pass?
>
>
> Pat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian D. Plikaytis" <bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net>
>
>
>
> > I'm using the Epson 1640 with it's transparency adapter to scan my 4x5
> black
> > and white negs. I find it is doing a fairly good job and I am getting
> output
> > that surpasses my darkroom prints. However, I did find that for a given
> > negative, I got much more out of the shadow areas with Vuescan as it
> allows
> > multiple pass scanning whereas the Epson TWAIN driver does not. I would
> > strongly recommend Vuescan if you purchase the Epson.
> >
> >
> > Brian
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > respond to bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Shough, Dean" <dean.shough@lmco.com>
> > To: <Filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:06 AM
> > Subject: filmscanners: Scanning 4x5 under $500 US?
> >
> >
> > > Not this question again! But scanners are coming way down in price,
> their
> > > resolution is going up, and now 12, 14, and even 16 bits per color are
> > > readily available. I have some 20 year old 4x5s (B&W, negative, and
> > slide)
> > > that I would like to play with again - I haven't worked with them or
> done
> > > any large format since I no longer have my own darkroom.
> > >
> > > I am in the market for a flatbed scanner that can do reasonable job
> with
> > 4
> > > by 5 film. I figure 1200 dpi is good enough for what I want, although
I
> > > have nothing against 1600 or 2400 dpi. ;-) My main concern with any
> > > flatbed scanner is the noise, particularly in slide shadows. The
> scanners
> > I
> > > am considering are:
> > >
> > > Epson Perfection 1640SU Photo - $299, USB & SCSI, 1600 dpi
> > > Microtek ScanMaker 5700 - $332, Firewire, 1200 dpi
> > > HP ScanJet 7400C - $440, SCSI and USB, 2400 dpi
> > > Canon Canoscan D2400F - $467, USB, 2400 dpi
> > > Agfa - no longer makes consumer scanners
> > >
> > > My questions about these scanners are:
> > >
> > > 1) Has anybody compared the noise or image quality of these scanners.
I
> > > would really like information where someone has tested at least two of
> > these
> > > scanners, using either slides or negatives, and can state that scanner
A
> > is
> > > better than scanner B for the following reason...
> > >
> > > 2) Can anybody verify that these scanners work with VueScan,
> particularly
> > on
> > > the Mac, either OS 9 or X? It looks like the HP and Epson run under
> > VueScan
> > > but that the Microtek and Canon will not.
> > >
> > > 3) Are the outputs of the HP and Epson limited to sRGB? I have been
> lead
> > to
> > > believe that this is the case with their consumer scanners.
> > >
> > > 4) Do all except the Microtek "fake" their high resolution by either
> > > microstepping a single CCD or using a pair of CCDs? I don't think any
> are
> > > using CCDs with more than 10,400 elements.
> > >
> > > 5) The Canon features FARE (similar to ICE). Does it require one scan
> or
> > > two in order to read the IR image? I am concerned about image
> > registration
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > 6) Is the output of the HP 16 bits or is it only capable of outputting
8
> > > bits per color? With HP's software and with VueScan?
> > >
> > > 7) Any hidden gottchas? Like no exposure control, crappie software,
> etc.
> > >
> > > 8) How much would I gain by going up to $1000? I am thinking here of
> the
> > > Epson 1680 or the Microtek 8700.
> > >
> > > --------
> > > Dean Shough
> > > dean.shough@lmco.com
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at
>
>
