SCANBACK: DICOMED (early betterlight) or POWERPHASE FX

[Jim collum]

33 seconds to scan Given the amount of work being done in Wet Plate, 33 seconds doesn't feel like all that long

Given that you can usually find a used Betterlight on ebay, the price would be much more reasonable than a brand new one. I remember when Kodak shut down their department, they put their entire stock on ebay , for about $5K each.

I'm not sure how obsolete they are though. As far as image quality and resolution, they've only recently been surpassed by the medium format backs. (with those going for *a lot* more). They're very reliable pieces of technology.. and produce the same images they did back in 2001.. so they're mainly obsolete from a marketing perspective. (Mike has a stock of parts on hand in the event that there is a hardware failure)

You can google for Kodak tri-linear ccd to find specs, but fact is kodak is not producing them anymore. Scan backs are history. Technologically they are pretty much obsolete. Comparing bits and megapixels makes no sense.



Look above "faster" is relative. They all take minutes to scan, if 1 min is faster than 2 - yes faster.

IMHO it will be crazy for amateur photographer to buy brand new scanback in 2014. If you are in digital you can get Sinar P3 or Arca digital ....

To me beauty of scanning back - it has scan area comparable to film size (7x10 cm). It can replace lengtly development process for experiments with film, will let you master view camera and LF lenses.

But if you are in to digital capture - scan back is absolete dinosaur, way bypassed by modern hardware.

[Adamphotoman]

The sunset, architecture shot above took 100 seconds. I shot it twice to make an HDR compiled image.iso 400 1/80 line time and at 50% res.

The files are much more malleable too!

[Adamphotoman]

I just got off the phone with Mike.
He tells me that YES he is indeed servicing Dicomeds. He also informed me that the Studio Pro does not take a battery.
So watch out for which model that you are thinking about.

Again the Bettelights are going for less than 5K...

I urge you to phone him for info, understanding and support. You won't be disappointed.

Grant Adam Kernan
aka
Adamphotoman

[artyvisual]

Thank you so far of all your help. Betterlight seems to be in favorite, especially by the very good support.
One of the advanteges the Powerphase FX had, was that they are powered by the firewire connectione, so there is no need for external battery/AC. But digging into it deeper, I read that the firewire of a macbook don't provide enough power to stable power the back. That is a bit of a problem when working outside the studio. I also know have to figure out if there is a easy way to deal with that. Perhaps anyone here knows this?

[shakeshuck]

I'm a bit late to this thread, but I thought I'd add some more info for those who might ask the same question.

I don't have any experience with Betterlight, but I do own a Powerphase FX+.

As far as the power is concerned, it works fine with firewire 400 but not 800. I bought a 12" G4 macbook to use in the field, it works well but the battery doesn't last long at all.

You also get less versatility than the specs suggest. I don't know if the BL's are the same, but on my Powerphase if you want full res you have to use it at iso100. Changing to iso200 will give you half the resolution, so if you want the best quality you have a 5-stop shutter variation and nothing else. In the studio that's not a problem, but in the field it can be very limiting.

One plus point of the FX is the probe (if you have one). It's meant for studio use to alter the exposure if there are problems with the lighting due to power fluctuations, but I find it also works rather well if the sun isn't consistent due to light clouds, etc.

In favour of the BL, I'm quite jealous of the pano adapter - I'd love to be able to play with one of those!

[artyvisual]

I'm a bit late to this thread, but I thought I'd add some more info for those who might ask the same question.

In the meanwhile I have bought a Powerphase. I prefered a Betterlight I think (better light sensitiviy and great support) , but was not able to one within range of my budget. I agree with the observation made by Shakeshuck. But the ISO limit is 200 and not 100 for full ress. I also use a 12" powerbook for field use, and that makes it a rather mobile set.
I would love to have the opportunity to work with a betterlight to do some side by side comparison.

[shakeshuck]

But the ISO limit is 200 and not 100 for full ress.

After your correction, I had to double-check!

It turns out I can get full res between iso 100 and 400 - it all depends on which film curve has been chosen. That doesn't mean (typically!) that you get to choose from all the options all the time; it only offers certain film speeds for certain film curves.