Re: [APML] Film Scanners

["Mark Park" <mark_park@hotmail.com>]

I use the much less expensive HP photosmart scanner and have been very happy 
with it's performance for astro and standard photos.  You may want to look 
at it.

I think you will find that photo CDs do not carry enough detail on the image 
to do you any good.  I've found (and there are certainly may people on this 
list that know better than I do), that you need to scan astophotos at 1200 - 
2400 dpi to be able to properly process them.  For example, if you want to 
unsharp mask (the "real" unsharp mask), it is important to have every little 
detail possiable available.  Once the image has been processed and you are 
happy with it, then you can reduce it's size, color depth, etc to get it to 
a more respectable file size.  Typically I scan in 2400 dpi which produces 
10 - 20 meg files.  After all my processing is complete, then I crop, etc to 
reduce the file size.  I guess what I'm trying saying is you will find that 
you can't fit may raw scans on a photo CD and the photo CDs you get from 
Kodak and other developers will be way to low on DPI.

-Mark Park

>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:31:01 -0600
>From: "Patrick M. Florer" <pflorer@pmflorer.com>
>Subject: [APML] Film Scanners
>
>Greetings !
>
>I have been following the discussions on this list for a few months now, 
>and
>have finally summoned up the gumption to ask a few questions.
>
>I am interested in purchasing a film scanner, for both general photographic
>use, as well as astrophotographic use.
>
>On the general photography side, I have inherited an archive of family
>pictures and slides, going back to the 1940's, which I would like to
>digitize and save on CD-ROM or DVD.  I am also spending a lot of money on
>film printing and picture and photo cd's.  Once in a while I get a picture
>that is worth keeping, but, by and large, I am wasting a lot of paper on
>prints that I have no place to store and no wish to keep.
>
>On the astrophotographic side, I am pretty much a beginner - I have a TAK
>FS-102 on an EM-10 mount, all kinds of adapters, etc, and Nikon F-3 and
>F-100 camera bodies, but no guiding mechanism like an off-axis guider, ST-4
>or STV, so I am limited at present to fairly short exposures.
>
>I have had some luck photographing the sun from my front yard through a
>Thousand Oaks Type II+ filter, but not much success yet with night-time
>objects.  I have a feeling that some of my attempts would look better if I
>subjected them to the kinds of scanning and processing which I read about 
>so
>often on this list.
>
>I have looked through the APML archives a little bit, but haven't found
>anything too useful yet.
>
>There are three scanners which look interesting to me right now:
>
>1)	Kodak RFS 3600 - about $900-1,000 to purchase - 3,600 dpi, USB or
>SCSI II - 100 rolls of Kodak film (which I could use!) included if 
>purchased
>by 12/31/01
>
>2)	Polaroid SS4000 - about $750 to purchase - 4,000 dpi - $200 rebate -
>but, since Polaroid filed for Chapter 11 protection a few weeks ago, I have
>substantial questions about warranty, support, and whether the Bankruptcy
>court will allow them to honor the rebate offer.
>
>3)	Nikon Coolscan 4000 - about $1600 to purchase, which is more that I
>really want to spend - and, I have heard some mention that the LED light
>source in the Nikon poses a problem for scanning certain kinds of 
>astrophoto
>negatives.
>
>Any feedback, comments, or alternative suggestions will be appreciated.
>
>Regards,
>
>Patrick Florer
>
>



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>