Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Well
I am a bit skeptical of this test.
in the close up of the image tango we see film grain
in the close up of the image imacon we se no film grain.
Either the operator of the Imacon was incompetent or just didn't focus.
I need to see something better than this, much like me making a enlargment from film 15xmag , one image no glass the other with glass, Which one do you folks think will be sharper and detail the films grain structure???
Redo the Imacon so we can see film grain and it will be a decent test.
I do imagine the tango can provide a better product but this test dosen't come close to real world situations.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
that's not film grain it's scan dot grain due to scan resolution and sharpening - the scan resolution is approximately 2040 dpi according to Doug - film grain is usually finer - that particular Imacon may have a lot of miles on it and require calibration. Jainco is an inexpensive scan house and WCI is not.
How much more real world can this test get? Two independent services using the same image. Now if Doug sent this image to Ted and I, he could get a scan from a Cezanne or IQ3 and a Cezanne Elite with operators of vastly different levels of experience.
Doug are you up for it? I'd scan the image just for comparison though I truly dislike 2040 as a target resolution.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Send the file to the same competent scanner operator, and judge the results.At least it would be a more fair test.
The imocan scanner deserves better representation than this test shows.
shit I can send trans to thousand's of houses to scans and they will be all over the roadmap in quality.
What are we judging here the relative merits of the scanners or just the abilitys of two different scanner operators??
I would love to see the results of different scans from different originals done on different scanners by the same competent scanner operator.
That IMO would start being a better test of scanners rather than sending out two two different film houses.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
the same competent scan operator would have to equally competent on all scanners and for what it's worth I get great scans from my elite and I don't have the experience Ted has.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Well if you are refering to Ted Harris then this is simple,
He is coming to my shop in late March , I can send him five or ten originals,or you can, he can scan them at his site using the different scanners he is comfortable with, and then he/me can scan them on my Imocan here. We will post the scans here on this thread, Lenny has promised to scan some stuff for me on his Astek and we could include the those as well if he agrees. I have had this task on my plate for about 6months now and have been so busy ,put it aside, but I am willing to do this now since I am in the market for a better than Imocan scanner and both Gents have contacted me to do some tests.
I am not saying this test will be the end all be all of tests but I think I can put my faith/belief in Ted and Lennys skills and see the results live on paper .
I am not doubting the quality of these other scanners , but I do question the way the tests are presented.
what do you think???
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jetcode
the same competent scan operator would have to equally competent on all scanners and for what it's worth I get great scans from my elite and I don't have the experience Ted has.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
The noise in the Drum scan is not good.
I too think that the Imacon scan is far too soft compared to those I achieve on my Precision II. Sharpening would definitely help and I wonder if they had enabled the Flexsoft facility in Flexcolor which is supposed to remove/minimise dust. I find this is awful and needs permanently disabling. Commercial scanner operators can be lazy and leave this on in order to save having to do much healing/cloning.
Agree and add my congratulations on a very fine picture which is worthy of a large print. The back garden scenes in Britain are rather more modest!
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bob carnie
what do you think???
sounds good bob
ultimately you are the one who needs to be satisfied - as I - I found what works for me and the only other scanner I ever used was a Imacon 646 which I thought was quite good but not like what I am getting now
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Sorry I brought to y'all's attention. This forum is little more than a glorified pissing contest.
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Doug Dolde
Sorry I brought to y'all's attention. This forum is little more than a glorified pissing contest.
not so Doug, people use the equipment you had your scans done with. They may not get the results you get. While I suspect that everything in your post is accurate the real question becomes one of process and equipment and that you had no real business with outside of your PS processing
Re: Tango versus Imacon 949 Test
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Doug Dolde
Sorry I brought to y'all's attention. This forum is little more than a glorified pissing contest.
How tremendously eloquent of you to make this observation. With this level of finesse, it is perhaps excusable that you have failed to notice the noise in the drum scanner shadows and be prepared to be so dismissive of those who have more experience and expertise in obtaining quality scans from Flextight scanners, who rightly question your data sample of a single scan.
Let us not belittle you any longer. Toodle pip.