[filmscanners] RE: Better DOF than Nikon?

["Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@ix.netcom.com>]

> From: Laurie Solomon
>
> I must be missing something. I gathered that many if not most were in such
> bad condition that they would require a lot of individual work after being
> dgitalized whether it is by a film scanner at higher resolutions or a
> flatbed scanner at lower resolutions.  Are you now saying that the major
> defect on many if not all the slides is basically that they are warped  (
> not charred or otherwise damaged.  Given the way things are
> advancing, I am
> not sure that we will see any further significant advances in scanners
> although it is true the cost of those that currently exist may
> come down in
> price and used ones definitely will come down within that price
> range as we
> move more and more into digital cameras.  This brings to mind an
> alternative
> suggestions.  Why not rephotograph the slides with a digital
> camera?  Surely
> they must have more depth of filed than 1 mm and would be well within your
> price range.

Some slides would require some cleanup in Photoshop, but surprisingly, most
look just fine except for the fuzziness caused by the inability to focus on
all parts of the slide. They're curved or rippled, and the cardboard mounts
are brown around the edges, but their color is unaffected. One of the ones I
sent Art had gotten really cooked, but I wanted to give him a hard one.

I'm actually thinking about trying to photograph the slides with my 10D, and
am wondering what lens I'd need in order to match up the 24x36mm slide to
the 15x22.5mm sensor. That would indeed solve the DOF problem.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body