 |
|
|
|
Next: Scanner
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 40
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:19 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)
|
|
|
"Väinö Louekari" <vaino.louekari RemoveThis @pp.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:NEa%f.251$Y03.14@read3.inet.fi...
> timeOday wrote:
>> Paul Rubin wrote:
>>
>>> "<RJ>" <baranick RemoveThis @localnet.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Does "scanning" produce better resolution than
>>>> the image produced by digicam electronics ?
>
> Actually ordinary consumer digital cameras do not capture as much detail
> as 35 mm slide film. Far from it. For example see
> http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/film.vs.digital.summary1.html
> According to Clark "The 11 megapixel canon 1Ds comes close to 35mm
> Velvia". And 1D is hardly a camera for everyone but a film SLR and slide
> film are. So shooting slide and scanning the results wtih a slide scanner
> makes a lot of sense if it is image quality you want.
>
> Väinö Louekari
Don't forget, when Roger wrote that, the 1Ds, at $7000 and 11 mp, was the ne
plus ultra of digital cameras. Now, the Nikon D200 ($1600) checks in at
nearly 11 mp, the D2X ($4000) at better than 12, both with 1.5x crop APS
sensors, the Canon 5D weighs in with a 35mm sized sensor and nearly 13mp
($3000) and the 1Ds mkII, at the same $7000 that its predecessor cost,
checks in at 16mp.
But if you're speaking of P&S type cameras, you are totally correct...
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Dec 07, 2005
Posts: 103
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 6:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 05, 2006
Posts: 704
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 7:37 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Mxsmanic wrote:
> Skip M writes:
>
> > Which is why scanning backs held on so long. They do produce better
> > results, but the inconvenience trumps that.
>
> Rather like film: it produces better results, but most people can't
> stand the inconvenience.
Well not if we are talking about detail then digital is far better then
35mm, when done right.
Although I don't like the invonvenience with film either.
The trap people who use film fall into time and again is assuming that
because that are scanning at 4000 ppi their image is the same as what a
20 MP digit camera would produce, in fact it fall far short of this.
Just as a referance if you were getting 4000 ppi or real pixels it
would look something like this.
http://www.sewcon.com/temp/4000ppi.jpg
Have you ever seen one of your scans even come close to that?
Scott >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 161
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<RJ> writes:
> Does "scanning" produce better resolution than
> the image produced by digicam electronics ?
Yes ... dramatically better.
> So why are slide copiers based on an old, and sloooow
> scanning technology ?
Scanning produces much better resolution and depth than trying to
shoot an entire slide at a time.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 40
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8ugq32t9lpp6n3pl72upd6earar00obrgp@4ax.com...
> <RJ> writes:
>
>> Does "scanning" produce better resolution than
>> the image produced by digicam electronics ?
>
> Yes ... dramatically better.
>
>> So why are slide copiers based on an old, and sloooow
>> scanning technology ?
>
> Scanning produces much better resolution and depth than trying to
> shoot an entire slide at a time.
>
Which is why scanning backs held on so long. They do produce better
results, but the inconvenience trumps that.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 161
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
timeOday writes:
> I know people like the insane resolutions you can capture with a
> scanner, but digicams capture just as much detail as 35mm film so I
> don't think it's justified.
Digicams don't capture as much detail as film; that's why some people
still shoot film.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 161
|
(Msg. 22) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Marvin writes:
> The highest-resolution, commercial, digicams can give a
> photo as detailed as one on 35 mm film.
My film scans have more detail than any DSLR I've seen.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 13, 2005
Posts: 18
|
(Msg. 23) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 05, 2006
Posts: 704
|
(Msg. 24) Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 11:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Mxsmanic wrote:
> Scott W writes:
>
> > The trap people who use film fall into time and again is assuming that
> > because that are scanning at 4000 ppi their image is the same as what a
> > 20 MP digit camera would produce, in fact it fall far short of this.
>
> The results I get are far better.
Would you care to share one of you images with us.
Scott >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 161
|
(Msg. 25) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:48 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Skip M writes:
> Depends on the "digicam." Nikon D200, D2X, Canon 5D, 1Ds mkII, and even
> possibly 20/30D and 1D mkIIn will give better results than most, or in some
> cases, any, 35mm film scanned.
Not if you are photographing slides. And not in general, either.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 23, 2005
Posts: 1029
|
(Msg. 26) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:48 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Skip M" <shadowcatcher.DeleteThis@cox.net> writes:
> > Not if you are photographing slides. And not in general, either.
>
> You mean photographing slides with the digital SLR? Then, you are right,
Yes, I think the question was about photographing slides with the SLR.
The context was roughly "I have this big pile of old slides that I
want to digitize. Does using a slide scanner work better for that
than using a camera, and if so, why?" >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 40
|
(Msg. 27) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:48 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fd4r325epm9no2pr9f0ccelolhb6veb10k@4ax.com...
> Skip M writes:
>
>> Depends on the "digicam." Nikon D200, D2X, Canon 5D, 1Ds mkII, and even
>> possibly 20/30D and 1D mkIIn will give better results than most, or in
>> some
>> cases, any, 35mm film scanned.
>
> Not if you are photographing slides. And not in general, either.
You mean photographing slides with the digital SLR? Then, you are right,
but I understood that to be a comparison of slide film vs. digital images,
not slide film converted to digital by photographing the slide with a
digital camera.
Compare images shot with any 100 ISO slide vs. an image shot with any of the
cameras I mention. The detail captured will favor the DSLR, not the 100 ISO
transparency.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 40
|
(Msg. 28) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 1:48 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xirpe8e5f.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher RemoveThis @cox.net> writes:
>> > Not if you are photographing slides. And not in general, either.
>>
>> You mean photographing slides with the digital SLR? Then, you are right,
>
> Yes, I think the question was about photographing slides with the SLR.
> The context was roughly "I have this big pile of old slides that I
> want to digitize. Does using a slide scanner work better for that
> than using a camera, and if so, why?"
Yes, but the post I was replying to said, "Yes," to the question, "Does
"scanning" produce better resolution than the image produced by digicam
electronics ?"
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 161
|
(Msg. 29) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:36 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Skip M writes:
> You mean photographing slides with the digital SLR?
Yes.
> Then, you are right, but I understood that to be a comparison
> of slide film vs. digital images, not slide film converted to
> digital by photographing the slide with a digital camera.
Even then, I prefer film.
> Compare images shot with any 100 ISO slide vs. an image shot with any of the
> cameras I mention. The detail captured will favor the DSLR, not the 100 ISO
> transparency.
I have yet to see that in any DSLR image. Maybe someday.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 40
|
(Msg. 30) Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:36 am
Post subject: Re: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:j67r32tuk1pujf1j0cib5ac7ei3s0rrjiv@4ax.com...
> Skip M writes:
>
>> You mean photographing slides with the digital SLR?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Then, you are right, but I understood that to be a comparison
>> of slide film vs. digital images, not slide film converted to
>> digital by photographing the slide with a digital camera.
>
> Even then, I prefer film.
For some things, so do I, but those cases are diminishing rapidly.
>
>> Compare images shot with any 100 ISO slide vs. an image shot with any of
>> the
>> cameras I mention. The detail captured will favor the DSLR, not the 100
>> ISO
>> transparency.
>
> I have yet to see that in any DSLR image. Maybe someday.
>
"None are so blind as those who will not see..."
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com >> Stay informed about: Slide Scanners.... WHY ?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
