Professional flatbed scanners?

[Kirk Gittings]

I'm not sure what the issue is with negatives vs. chromes. Whether I am shooting negs chromes, (or DC for that matter) I supply files to all my clients. Color Negs scan fine. As a matter of fact I oftentimes have shot chromes and color negs on the same shoot (NPS and Velvia 100f chromes for the architecture, color negs for the people shots) and could scan them to look alike with little trouble.

[Ted Harris]

BTW, to the best of my understanding, all of the current high end flatbeds, including the EverSmart Supreme, Fujis, IQSmart, etc, use the same Kodak 8,000 element CCD. Therefore, any differences in performance would be due to lens quality, how the lens sees the scanned material, stitching type, etc.

Some very experienced users on the Scan Hi-End forum claim that the
Rodenstock lens of the EverSmart gives sharper results than that of IQSmart scanners, but I don't know if that is true. I do know for a fact that the effective resolution of my EverSmart Pro scanner is about 95% of optical maximum. Optical maximum is 3175 ppi, and tested effective is well over 3000 ppi, and that is over the entire scanning area of 12X17".

Sandy King

[Frank Petronio]

I was merely making a wry observation, not trying to change a workflow (that has already been obsolesed anyways).

I always laughed when producton people and art directors would slavishly try to match the chrome when it was the chrome's interpretation that was probably the weakest link in the imaging chain. Or the ad agency's $49.95 crappy 9300 degree Kelvin light box... And while it was easier for the pro photographer to deliver a chrome, the behind the scenes pre-press work was pretty intensive and expensive.

Anyway, you going to jump Kirk?

[Ted Harris]

While I believe Sandy's comment is correct regarding the current high end flat beds I am not sure that it applies to older generation machines bearing the same name (e.g. the current Supreme is actually the sceond model and there is an earlier machine also called the Supreme). I believe you will find that all of the current generation deliver real world resolution over 4000 spi.

Additionally, the DMax discussions are a tempest in a teapot. All of the current and last generation high end flatbeds deliver real world DMax over 3.7 which easily exceeds the range of film.

[sanking]

Sandy, the IQsmarts use a 10,200 element tri linear ccd. The top optical resolution on the IQSmart 3 is 5500 ppi.

Current Creo/Kodak literature for the IQSmart3 and EverSmart Supreme indicate slightly higher optical resolution for the EverSmart. Optical resolution for the EverSmart is stated to be 5600 ppi.

Sandy

[sanking]

While I believe Sandy's comment is correct regarding the current high end flat beds I am not sure that it applies to older generation machines bearing the same name (e.g. the current Supreme is actually the sceond model and there is an earlier machine also called the Supreme). I believe you will find that all of the current generation deliver real world resolution over 4000 spi.

I did not suggest otherwise. My EverSmart Pro is clearly an older generation scanner that at 3175 ppi does not deliver as much resolution as current EverSmart Supreme models.

Sandy King

[Brian K]

I was merely making a wry observation, not trying to change a workflow (that has already been obsolesed anyways).

I always laughed when producton people and art directors would slavishly try to match the chrome when it was the chrome's interpretation that was probably the weakest link in the imaging chain. Or the ad agency's $49.95 crappy 9300 degree Kelvin light box... And while it was easier for the pro photographer to deliver a chrome, the behind the scenes pre-press work was pretty intensive and expensive.

If executed by someone who truly was a professional photographer, and I just don't mean they get paid, but someone with real professional standards, the color and exposure on the final chromes delivered to the client were dead on. Even if the art director had a crappy light box, as long as the printer had an accurate light box and reflective light illuminator ( which good printers almost always had) to use to match the printing to the original chrome, then the end result would be accurate.

Sandy the current Eversmart delivers 5600ppi optical, the current IQSmart3 is 5500ppi.
Here is the Kodak spec comparisons for the current IQSmart and Eversmart scanners:

http://graphics1.kodak.com/us/produc...ifications.htm

[Kirk Gittings]

Additionally, the DMax discussions are a tempest in a teapot. All of the current and last generation high end flatbeds deliver real world DMax over 3.7 which easily exceeds the range of film.
Ted Harris

And, I believe far exceeds all output materials? Or is that comparing apples and oranges.

[jetcode]

Here are a couple of more images at 5300dpi, the optical max for the Cezanne Elite. I used the same area as the other images for comparison. This testing is not empirical by any means because I am still learning how to use this tool. However the only processing I have done is levels adjust in PS and much less this time then last. I notice that the differentiation is good but the noise is higher indicating the grain of the film. I want to try a wet scan at some point to see how that affects the noise floor. No sharpening has been applied to either image in PS. All scans use a sharp finish, a scan setting. There are some new controls I am discovering but I am completely convinced that I am missing the software manual for this scanner. I am going by the Start Guide which is minimal at best.

Joe

[sanking]

Sandy the current Eversmart delivers 5600ppi optical, the current IQSmart3 is 5500ppi.
Here is the Kodak spec comparisons for the current IQSmart and Eversmart scanners:

http://graphics1.kodak.com/us/produc...ifications.htm

Agreed. I believe that is what I noted in a previous message?

From the literature the EverSmart Supreme and Select II appears to win on almost every point.

Sandy