> My point of reference was the Imacon II scanner, which is
> very sharp as long as the negs aren't too long. The Nikon was
> comparable in sharpness, but with fewer image quality
> problems than the Imacon. I'm sure the newer Imacon's are a
> lot better, but they weren't available to me last year.
>
I looked at the Imacons as well but was pretty under whelmed by the
price/performance ratio. The software did have a pretty good Colorsync
implementation though. I did find there were focus issues with that
machine as well. It's hard to avoid unless film is sandwiched in a
glass carrier or between a drum and clear sheet. That's really the only
way to get consistent results, day in and day out.
Lawrence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
