ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Scanner resolution (was: BWP seeks scanner)



> Someone else made a good point though - how long did the
> leafscan take to produce the scan compare to the Nikon?  How long
> from holding
> the piece of film to having the TIFF file on the computer?

The scan time for most any scanner is reasonably deterministic.  It is the
(exposure time * the number of lines) + n seconds per pass.  For the Leaf
45, n is 5.

For 16ms for 5080 lines, the scan time would be 86.28 seconds per pass, or
about 1.5 minutes x 3 scans or 4.5 minutes.  For 60ms it would be about 15
minutes...  You can go up to +3 stops, which ends up being many many
hundreds of ms...but scanning at anything but minimum really only does you
any good for slides.  It'll scan at a DMax of 3.3 for minimum exposure, and
any negative film won't reach that.

I am sure the Nikon is substantially faster than the Leaf, since the Leaf is
a three pass scanner, and the Nikon is one pass, but since the Leaf can do
B&W in one pass, and has a ND filter for scanning B&W, I believe it easily
holds its own with any other scanner for B&W work.




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.