Current view on drum scanners?
"Airbus" wrote in message ... What's the consensus, as we close 2008? Anyone still using drum scanners with PMT tubes? Any particular reason, from a photographer's point of view, why this technology is still pertinent, or do most users fee that fletbed scanners have come to where they can replace this older technology? Interested to hear views from anyone still using this. . . Thanks You mean you use a scanner in your darkroom? How quaint! |
Current view on drum scanners?
Airbus wrote:
What's the consensus, as we close 2008? Anyone still using drum scanners with PMT tubes? Any particular reason, from a photographer's point of view, why this technology is still pertinent, or do most users fee that fletbed scanners have come to where they can replace this older technology? Interested to hear views from anyone still using this. . . Thanks For some reason, you leave out the dedicated film scanners with CCDs, which fill the gap between these two. Flatbeds are the low-end of these three options. Neil |
Current view on drum scanners?
What's the consensus, as we close 2008?
Anyone still using drum scanners with PMT tubes? Any particular reason, from a photographer's point of view, why this technology is still pertinent, or do most users fee that fletbed scanners have come to where they can replace this older technology? Interested to hear views from anyone still using this. . . Thanks |
Current view on drum scanners?
"Airbus" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Airbus" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Airbus" wrote in message .. . What's the consensus, as we close 2008? Anyone still using drum scanners with PMT tubes? Any particular reason, from a photographer's point of view, why this technology is still pertinent, or do most users fee that fletbed scanners have come to where they can replace this older technology? Interested to hear views from anyone still using this. . . Thanks You mean you use a scanner in your darkroom? How quaint! My scanners don't actually go *in* the darkroom, as I'm afraid some well-meaning nit will spray water all over them! Mine go in the repro room, which joins the darkroom, just before the mounting and framing shop, and adjoining the projection room and reception areas. So explain, please, the relevance of scanners in this newsgroup "rec.photo.darkroom." After all, a darkroom is a darkroom is a darkroom is a darkroom...is it not? Can be anything from a laundry room to a flower garden, depending on your means and interpretation. I'm seeking meaningful information from serious contributors. Care to join? Well, I don't go around making up new definitions for existing words. As far as "darkroom" is concerned, here are references/definitions on the net. Care to cite references supporting relevance of scanners in this newsgroup? Exactly what is your logic and thinking such as to be consistent with these definitions? from dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=darkroom noun Photography. a room in which film or the like is made, handled, or developed and from which the actinic rays of light are excluded from Merriam-Webster dictionary http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/darkroom : a room with no light or with a safelight for developing light-sensitive photographic materials from MSN Encarta dictionary http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/darkroom.html room for developing photographs: a room from which natural light is excluded so that light-sensitive photographic materials can be safely handled and photographs can be developed from American Heritage dictionary http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texi...arkroom&db=ahd ....A room in which photographic materials are processed, either in complete darkness or with a safelight.... from PhotoNotes.org dictionary of film and digital photography http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/search...rkroom&which=a Light-tight room used for photographic work and illuminated by safelights. Small facilities are usually divided into two halves - a wet side for handling chemicals and rinsing baths and a dry side for enlargements. Larger facilities usually involve separate rooms for enlarging and the chemical baths. |
Current view on drum scanners?
Airbus wrote:
Ancillary question, not without importance - is anyone still making PMT-based drum scanners? Anyone know what PMT devices they are using? I believe so: http://www.aztek.net/premier.html http://www.icg.ltd.uk/products/drum_scanners.htm -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 15:00:01 up 5 days, 44 min, 4 users, load average: 4.75, 4.74, 4.62 |
Current view on drum scanners?
Airbus wrote:
In article , says... Airbus wrote: Ancillary question, not without importance - is anyone still making PMT-based drum scanners? Anyone know what PMT devices they are using? I believe so: http://www.aztek.net/premier.html http://www.icg.ltd.uk/products/drum_scanners.htm Thanks for that. Aztek was always considered a sort of "entry level" player, but the fact that ICT is still a player and still offering new products is telling. Amazing that this 1930's technology still holds its own, and indeed offers the "high end" solution in today's digital world. . . Some inventions are really more important than others. The insignificant ones disappear in a few years. Others are more long-lasting. The photomultiplier tube is one of the important ones (that have use in other situations than scanners). But something as sensitive as a PMT with a low signal-to-noise ratio is really something. An older one, analogue photography (1839, officially, but at least a decade older), has had even more impact. -- .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 15:40:01 up 5 days, 1:24, 4 users, load average: 4.58, 4.43, 4.45 |
Current view on drum scanners?
"Airbus" wrote in message ... In article , says... Well, I don't go around making up new definitions for existing words. You don't need to - You've already invented water spray for home darkrooms! A true visionary! hmmm...so this is your logic and thinking such as to be consistent with the cited darkroom definitions? No wonder you posted here! |
Current view on drum scanners?
Airbus wrote:
In article , says... Airbus wrote: What's the consensus, as we close 2008? Anyone still using drum scanners with PMT tubes? Any particular reason, from a photographer's point of view, why this technology is still pertinent, or do most users fee that fletbed scanners have come to where they can replace this older technology? [...] For some reason, you leave out the dedicated film scanners with CCDs, which fill the gap between these two. Flatbeds are the low-end of these three options. Well here you can correct me as I thought these were essentially the same as flatbed scanners (also CCD) with the addition of plastic trays and holders to make it easier to position the film on the flatbed, but in performance besically the same thing. The question becomes to what extent software management can overcome the intrinsic drawbacks of CCD arrays (noise, resolution which "is what it is") to the point of rivaling the very old, analog tube with intrinsically superior sensitivity characteristics, but which is a pain in the but to manage. . . Are we there yet? A lot depends on what kind of result you want or need. Regarding such things as resolution, color integrity, and dynamic range, a typical CCD film scanner outperforms the best flatbeds. PMT drum scanners outperform the best dedicated CCD film scanners, but not everyone requires these that of performance, and many are satisfied with the results from their flatbeds. For example, if your intention is to use the scans on the web, a flatbed is the best choice, but if your intention is to get the maximum enlargement possible, the PMT or dedicated film scanners are the best choices. Another consideration is the film size. For 35mm, the CCD film scanners are far better than flatbeds, but for 4x5, your choices are much more limited, and for 8x10, it's either flatbed or PMT, AFAIK. Ancillary question, not without importance - is anyone still making PMT-based drum scanners? Anyone know what PMT devices they are using? For many, the difference in quality between a dedicated CCD film scanner and a PMT drum scanner is not great enough to warrant the extra cost and hassle. That doesn't mean that there isn't a difference, but it does reduce the size of the market for PMT scanners. -- Neil |
Current view on drum scanners?
On 11/11/2008 2:20 PM Lawrence Akutagawa spake thus:
"Airbus" wrote in message ... In article , says... Well, I don't go around making up new definitions for existing words. You don't need to - You've already invented water spray for home darkrooms! A true visionary! hmmm...so this is your logic and thinking such as to be consistent with the cited darkroom definitions? No wonder you posted here! If I might step into this little brouhaha for just a second, I think you (Lawrence) are being a bit too picky here. Now, I'm about as "strict constructionist" as you can get regarding Usenet group topics: I'm currently involved in an effort to rid r.p.e.35mm of the off-topic digital SLR posters there. (Wish me luck on that one.) But I think in this case this subject (film scanners) falls well within the purview of darkroom practice: many folks who shoot film use a "hybrid" process of developing film, then scanning and printing in the digital realm. So I believe it's not so far off topic as you make it sound. -- Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral. - Paulo Freire |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com