RE: filmscanners:minolta and med format

["Wilson, Paul" <PWilson@gomez.com>]

Actually, it looks like I'm at least partially wrong on this.  I didn't know
about this other film holder.  Are there any pictures of it on the web?
They have versions for both the Scan Multi and the Scan Multi Pro.

Paul Wilson

> -----Original Message-----
> From: LAURIE SOLOMON [mailto:LAURIE@ADVANCENET.NET]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:19 PM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: RE: filmscanners:minolta and med format
> 
> 
> >For the Scan Multi Pro, this is misleading at best.
> 
> Ok, I am willing to concede and accept this since I was 
> extrapolating from
> the information that I have on the two earlier models and 
> what I have heard
> or read on mailing lists and catalog blurbs for the Multi 
> Pro.  However, it
> is not inaccurate or impossible for the two earlier models 
> using the new
> Scan Multi software upgrade and the Universal Film Holder 
> which was designed
> purposefully for the purpose of scanning medium format frames in three
> sections by relocating and repositioning the frame in the 
> holder so as to
> achieve maximum optical resolution scans of 2280 DPI across the whole
> negative when stitched.  Otherwise the medium format frame 
> could only be
> scanned down the center portion at that maximum optical 
> resolution and then
> only when using the newer upgraded Scan Multi software.
> 
> >on the subject of interpolation
> 
> I agree with Ed on this; it certainly is interpolation.  I 
> think it may be
> debatable whether or not the scanner is actually extracting 
> more information
> *from the film* at 4800 dpi than at 3200 dpi or if it is as 
> Ed appears to be
> saying - the increase in dpi represents a function of the 
> mechanics of the
> stepper motor and not the amount of information being extracted by the
> sensors.
> 
>       From the mouth of Minolta (i.e., their web site):
>       4,800 dpi scanning
>       The new Minolta DiMAGE Scan Multi PRO film scanner is 
> equipped with 4,800
> dpi optical resolution for 35mm. With a pixel count of more 
> than 33-million,
> an A3-size output can retain a resolution of more than 400 
> dpi. *Medium
> format film also can have a 4,800 dpi interpolated resolution 
> for up to 6 x
> 9cm high-resolution*, clear and crisp images with more than 
> 169 million
> pixels and a 600 dpi. (emphasis indicated by * is mine).
> 
>       And in another page of the web site for the Multi Pro:
> 
> Optical Resolution
>  35mm film: 4,800 x 4800 dpi
> 120/220 film: : 4,800 (by interpolation) x 4,800 dpi
> 
> Maximum Input Resolution
>  35mm film: 4,800 x 4,800 dpi
> 120/220 film: 4,800 (by interpolation) x 4,800 dpi
> 
> 
> >I have the Scan Multi Pro at home.  Simply, no stitching is 
> needed to scan
> >at 3200 dpi or 4800 dpi for medium format film up to 6x9.
> 
> The information on the Minolta site suggests differently in 
> that it suggests
> that to obtain an optical resoplution on medium format up to 
> 6x9cm you need
> to use the optional Multi Format Set accessory which Minolta 
> describes as:
> 
> Question: What size film can be used in the multi-format 
> attachment HS-P1?
> Answer:  The acceptable width in the attachment is 102mm at 
> maximum. The
> height (the length in film loading direction) is not mechanically
> restricted, but the film beyond 167mm from the edge cannot be 
> scanned. The
> actual size of the scan area at maximum is 56.5x83.8mm (6x9).
> 
> I assume that this Multi Format Set along with the Universal 
> Holder permits
> one to reposition medium format film frames so as to be able 
> to scan the
> sections at the optical maximum of 4800 dpi resolution 
> without interpolation
> across the entire frame after stitching.  I say "assume" 
> because this was
> the case with the earlier models using just the upgraded 
> software and the
> then optional Universal holder alone and because I dould not find any
> detailed information on the Minolta site regarding the Multi 
> Format SET
> optional accessory or how it works.
> 
> My tentative conclusion is that you may think you are 
> scanning the entire
> medium format frame at an optical 4800 dpi when in reality it is an
> interpolated 4800 dpi.
>