o Doesn't the bulk slide feeder cost an extra $500?
o Edge softness on cardboard mounted, 20 year old Kodachromes can be
so bad that my 2,300 dpi filmscanner is sharper across the slide than
my Nikon is in the fuzzy areas. For some slides I've tested this
remains true event if you manually set the focus point halfway
between the extremes of the curvature.
o Haven't done enough scanning of negs to have data re. curvature
with the negative holders.
o I use the NikonScan 3.1 software as a Photoshop plug-in, and for
the most part it works just fine.
o On color negs, any slight surface scratches on the non-emulsion
side of the film base will be turned into huge white gashes in the
scan. Digitial ICE does an amazing job of removing nearly all
evidence of these, but takes a loooong time and "shouldn't" be
necessary in the first place.
--Bill
At 6:16 PM +0300 23-1-02, Jeremy Nicholl wrote:
>Anyone here using the Nikon 4000ED and either very happy or unhappy
>with it? I'm particularly interested in any comments on the
>functionality of the optional bulk slide feeder. I already have a
>Polaroid SS4K and I'm happy with the quality, but the lack of a bulk
>feeder is really becoming a problem.
>
>I gather there are problems with the Nikon software, but I imagine
>those can be avoided by using Vuescan and/or Silverfast. What about
>the alleged edge softness in the scans? Is it really necessary to
>remount transparencies in glass mounts? And if so, what are about
>sharpness with the negative film holder?
--
======================================================================
Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design
(505) 346-3080 * bill_sub@billfernandez.com *
======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
