What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Stick with film and get a decent scanner

Jurgen:

G'Day. Nice link to KenRockwell. I've been to his site many times. Somewhat 'advertorial' in places but good general information. It has many many 'paid' links so I always wonder if some of the thoughts are from the manufacturers or from his experiences. But good, nevertheless.

About DMax. I remember once (in the military) crossing a small stream in the dead black of night, in a forest, by walking along a fallen tree. Next morning, coming back, we found that the tree was wet and mossy and treacherous, and at least 20 feet (6m) above the rocky stream. None of us could cross it. So, sometimes I wish I didn't know about DMax. My pictures were just fine before I started to read about it. :) Know what I mean? Just shoot.

And by the way, don't let our fellow posters fool you about 'Quantum Leap'. When a baby Kangaroo finally leaves the mother's pouch and first jumps a boundary fence without touching the top wire - the 'Roo parents refer to it as a Kuantum. That's the origin of the word. Ask any Kangaroo.

Cheers, Mate !

Colin

PS The food fight was fun, though.
 
Marc

Thank you very much for your generous offer . Thats just great spirit of comradeship .
But I warn you , I might come back to that offer for a 6x12 negative
happy.gif

if you can do that as well .

Colin

Nice to receive a sign of life from you . I can not say G'day , because I am not an Australian . But I like it . So I will say Greas dee from Bavaria .

z04_bier01.gif



Don't worry , I have got nothing to do with Quantum Leap .
But I am thinking to replace my ARTIXSCAN 1800f , which is a great scanner for 4x5 and larger , but has only a resolution of 1800 PPI for any format you scan with it . That new ARTIXSCAN M1 will have 4800 PPI . That would be a great progress .
I could not find anything about that sacnner for the german market yet .

So its CFV time now and here is a little postcard from Bavaria




33371.jpg


That water is so clear that you can brew bavarian beer with it . Cheers Colin
 
Hi Q.G.,

> DMax, by the way, is, as the name suggests, a value. Not a range. > A value that marks the end of a range.

It depends on the context. dMax, in the context of a film scanner's performance, typically refers to the scanner's dynamic range. Dynamic range IS a relative number, and IS a range, not simply an absolute value like density (or D) on film that you measure with a densitometer.

dMax is an ill used term and gets confusing, because dMax is also sometimes used to represent the largest measured density value in the case of film. A better term when talking about scanner's performance, IMO, is dRange or simply calling it dynamic range, instead of dMax.

If a film scanner is spec'd at, say, 3.8, that does not mean that it can't get valid data out of negatives that have a higher density, say, 4.2. It can. Simply increase exposure or open the aperture. What 3.8 means is the system has a dynamic range of 10**3.8 or a ratio of 6310:1...where 1 is the noise, and 6301 is the limit of what can be measured relative to noise. If a positive, for ex&le, exceeds this dynamic range, then one end gets clipped (you lose detail). This can be done from the light or the dark end, and if done from the light end, your scanner will record a higher density value than the ill term'd "dMax".

For ex&le say a negative's maximum density gives an A/D value of 1586 or log10 3.2. The minimum density gives an A/D value of 6 or log10 .8. That is an overall dynamic range of log10 2.4.

A different negative registers a maximum density of 631 or log10 2.8 and a minimun density of 3 or log10 .4. A scanner that has a dynamic range of 2.4 can scan the full range of both negatives, though the two negatives absolute densities (D) are different.

I'll reiterate again, the "dMax" (or dynamic range, which is what is meant by dMax when used in the contect of a scanner's performance) of a scanner is not directly related to density (D). Density (D) is a calibrated/standardized value, dMax/dynamic range of a scanner is not. One scanner may represent an absolute density D of 3.2 as a completely different data value than any other scanner or even another scanner of it's own make/model, simply due to A/D gain circuitry, number of bits, exposure time or aperture.

Regards,

Austin
 
And just for the record, in British legal usage "quantum" refers to the actual sums of money involved in a civil law suit. Quantum has a restricted meaning in quantum physics, referring to indivisible amounts (of energy, for ex&le). In Latin quantum simply meant "how much" or amount, with no implication of a minimal or indivisible quantity. It is not really not appropriate for use outside these areas. So much for pedantry! Incidentally, do not confuse pedantry with paedophilia or pediatrics! It has been known - in England a vigilante mob demonstrated outside a pediatricians house.
 
Hi Marc,

> I never took the Imacon claim "Virtual Drum" to mean it was a claim to > be a real drum scanner ( thus the "virtual")

I have no *big* problem with the use of "virtual", though I feel it IS misleading, but B&H (and others) are advertising it AS a drum scanner. This is entirely misleading.

> but more that the > intent was to somewhat replicate the effect in practice ... meaning, > "keep" the portion of the film being scanned the same distance" to > help assure the same effect as if it were flat.

That is not the intent of a drum scanner, per se, but an effect of it's principle of operation...the rotating cylinder. So, this asled they claim to be related to a drum, is, IMO, an insignificant relationship and therefore makes their claim very very very weak.

And of course, the 949 is a superb scanner, I believe that is not in question ;-)

Best Regards,

Austin
 
Jurgen, I can scan three 6X6 frames at once, including the spaces in between ... so one 6X12 is quite doable and I'd welcome a shot at one of those.


Any one got a 6X17 frame?


The scanner does 4X5 also. I scanned a 4X5 just recently.
 
Seems like the times are unrealistically high

With re: to the comment "Flextight Photo, a 6x7 > scan takes about 10-15 minutes each "

Just to keep us all on the same plateau of understanding. If you have 12 good shots and wanted to scan them, how long would this operation take us?

Some of us are new (mea maxima culpa) and it seems to take me longer to get the four negs in the epson's V750 holder three times than to scan the four individual slides three times.
 
I came to this conclusion.....

I was going to get a H3D-31 digital and lenses and that meant A LOT OF MONEY AND A LOT OF TIME ON PHOCUS CORRECTING so i thought to hell with that.....

.....instead i bought Hasselblad 500 C/M; 2000 FC/M, 4 lenses, 5x4 Sinar F2 kit with 1 lens, Rollei T, and loads of film.....

I have a ScanMate 5000 drum scanner since 1994 that scans at 5000 dpi and I'm happy happy happy.....

Right now im into Portra 160NC and its kicking my digitals ass every time.....

Bliss

fotografz said:
Remember, the following is from a person up to his eyeballs in top end MF digital equipment ... including a Leaf Aptus 75, Hasselblad H3D/39 & H2D/CFH-22, and a Hasselblad CFV.

Not only do I have it, but I've been using MF digital backs for many years now and do know how to get the most from them.

The digital backs are fantastic, I have to have them to survive in the commercial world of photography. And admittedly they are fun to use personally if you are an "immediate need" sort of person. However, were it not for that commercial need, I may have only secured the CFV ... if that.

The reason is that film is equally fantastic, even if you bring it into the digital domain after processing the film, and never go into the darkroom.

So with a fraction of the investment a digital back represents, you can equal (or IMHO, even exceed) MF digital imagery. Now I know there are lot of pretty accomplished folks that would beg to differ with me. But in discussions with them I've felt many didn't like the dicipline of film in the first place, and tend to prefer the flawlessly smooth regimentation of pixels over the randomness of grain ... which IMO adds that quality of being more lifelike and provides more of a sense of visual depth.

I was struck by this as I began using the new Epson 3800 to make larger prints than I've done in the past. Mind you, I've made four prints so far, three of which were shot on film and scanned on my old Minolta Multi-Scan Pro ... NOT the Imacon 949. I'll be printing some of those 949 scans next.

So, IMO, for a comparative pittance, one can stand toe-to-toe with the best digital backs out there ... you just won't be fullfilling that "immediate need" gap if you have one : -)

Shoot film and enjoy. Digital backs will always be there if you want one.
Click to expand...
 
Not sure why I feel disappointed with that news.

Seen his digital stuff come and go, and come and go ..... but his scanner. OMG.

Must have sold his V stuff as well. What will he be clutching now when the coffin lid closes, I wonder ? :)
 
Circumstances change rapidly these days for professional photographers.
Many studios close because there is not enough work for them.

This means lots of studio gear will hit the market for exceptionally low prices.

It also means that those who decide to go on look at their equipment inventory
and decide to let go of items that are not used frequently.


Vic.
 
That doesn't describe Marc, I'm afraid. :)

I've known him for a long time and dined at his house. The 203FE and his X5 were hard won and he had a burning passion for them. My Avatar is stuff he once owned.

Problem for all film photographers is that there's a pleasure in the craft and a final look that can't be replaced by digital, IMO. It can cause one to return time and again to the question of: is this digital stuff worthwhile, or just convenient ?

Marc has/had an original framed photo of Igor Stravinsky in his hallway. I suspect he gets great pleasure from that silver print.

Maybe, I'm just on the 'return loop' again. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top