I'm not Joel, but I have some experience with the 2740's little brother
(2720) and a lot of experience with the SS4000.
For me, this is an easy questiom -- go for the resolution, everytime.
ICE is convenient, but it isn't rocket science. Virtually the same
capabilities are available in Vuescan (www.hamrick.com) for a whopping $40.
Honestly, though, I very, very rarely use Vuescan's capabilities. Unless
you're scanning really wacky negatives (or slides, but my experience is
negatives), I don't think you would use ICE often. Let's face it, it is a
compromise. It may clean the negatives, but at the cost of sharpness. I
can clean them just as well with the cloning tool and a little more 'elbow
grease'.
However, nothing can make up for pixels. I wish there was a way I could
show you the stunning 13x19 prints on my wall. All created from an inkjet
printer (Epson 1270). There is literally no way they could have come from a
2700dpi printer. Just not possible.
Just do the math. The Acer is 2700dpi. The maximum scanning are is 24mm x
35mm or 24/25.4 x 35/25.4 = .94in x 1.38in
2700x.94=2538
2700x1.38=3726
3726x2538=6943968 or roughly 7megapixels
The Polaroid is 4000dpi. Assuming the same max scan area:
4000x.94=3760
4000x1.38=5520
3760x5520=20755200 or roughly 20megapixels
In other words, almost 3 TIMES the information. I'm not knocking the Acer,
it is a fine scanner, I just like to get everything I can out of my
pictures. This is also why I laugh when I hear the digital 'matches' 35mm.
Matches? They have about 15megapixels to go. And that's compared to a
consumer scanner, not a quality drum scan.
I've considered 'upgrading' to the Nikon LS4000 so that I would have ICE and
4000dpi. Decided against it. The reviews I've seen on the Nikon and the
actual user experiences are middle of the road. I believe the Polariod is
its equal, if not better.
For those of you with a fast internet connection, or real patience, I put up
on of the fullsize TIFF files on my website. Here's the link:
http://www.zuikoholic.com/dp2-22a-02.tmp
Once it is downloaded, just rename it from tmp to tif. I changed it so it
would force a download. If I didn't, your browser would attempt to display
it and would just not like it.
This is a full size scan from the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000. It has been
leveled and sharpened slightly, but is otherwise pretty 'raw'. It is also
63MB, so please don't all download it at once or you'll bring our cable
modem to its knees.
Just my thoughts.
Tom
> Joel -- I was considering the Acer Scanwit 2740S, which includes the ICE
> capability. However, although it is a lower cost, it is also lower
> resolution. I don't anticipate ever needing to scan larger than 35mm
format,
> but how would you evaluate the tradeoff in resolution v/s the ICE
> capability? If the SS4000 is available at about $700 the cost difference
is
> only about $200 for the higher resolution. I anticipate that most of my
> scanning will be for eventual output in high-quality inkjet printouts of
up
> to about 8x10, or possibly 11x14 if I buy a larger printer.
> --
>
> Jim Brokaw
> OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|