Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47

Thread: Figital Scanner Solution

  1. #11
    jp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    5,628

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Aside from losing the cinema business, film can't bottom out much more.

    To me it seems there are far more photographs in existence presently than in the short/medium term business for film sales potential.

    If an irresistable scanner is the way to rebuild film, it should be equally marketed to people who want to share their history, i.e. scan their shoeboxes of photos to share with the world on facebook, dvds etc... Snapshots that are gaining in both sentimental and network effect value.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Seattle area, WA
    Posts
    1,328

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    What they really need to do is design film that can ONLY be read digitally and is designed for easy, quick scanning. Since you wouldn't have to worry about things like orange negative masks anymore, and human readable colors then maybe you could design a film that is better than we have now? Perhaps it could even be erasable and re-usable after being scanned.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Posts
    44

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Ten years ago a first rate scanner costed in access of one milion dollars. Since then a lot of components have dropped in price, so the hardware itself now maybe would be between 100,000 and 200.000. On the other hand all of the preducers have stopped making this kind of stuff, and there are not many people left, who can design such a thing, in fact not many people would even recognise it, if it were. What would you think would be the public for such a thing. Two different classes were recognised the mid-end and the low-end scanners. Among the last were the Imagon, still costing 50.000 or more. A expert lithographer found with an Imacon, could close its business.

    99% of the large format photographers think the Imagon is too expensive, even at second hand prices of a few thousand dollars. Many even think that the Epson scanners are worth considering. For those I have one advice: sell your LF stuff, buy a modern mobile telephone, and you will easily surpass the LF / epson combination. About the same as publishing your LF photos at 72 dpi.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    104

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Quote Originally Posted by domaz View Post
    What they really need to do is design film that can ONLY be read digitally and is designed for easy, quick scanning. Since you wouldn't have to worry about things like orange negative masks anymore, and human readable colors then maybe you could design a film that is better than we have now? Perhaps it could even be erasable and re-usable after being scanned.
    Something like this :
    http://www.ideinc.com/silfilm.html

  5. #15
    Resident Heretic Bruce Watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    USA, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,362

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Quote Originally Posted by seepaert View Post
    Ten years ago a first rate scanner costed in access of one milion dollars. Since then a lot of components have dropped in price, so the hardware itself now maybe would be between 100,000 and 200.000. On the other hand all of the preducers have stopped making this kind of stuff, ...
    So much mis-information!

    Ten years ago, Heidelberg was exiting the scanner business, leaving only Screen (Japan) and Aztek (USA) making drum scanners. A few years later ICG (England) was resurrected and re-entered the drum scanner business. Those three manufacturers are still making, selling, refurbishing, and servicing their drum scanners today. The current leader of this pack seems to be Aztek. Aztek doesn't post the price of their Premier drum scanner on their website, but it's rumored to be somewhere around $40k USD, but I don't really know since I'm not in the market for one.

    In 2001 the cost of a new drum scanner was well under $200k US dollars. In fact my Optronics ColorGetter 3 Pro drum scanner was only in the $60-80k USD range when new back in 1995. Today one can get complete turnkey drum scanner packages for $2K USD or less on the used equipment market. These 15 year old designs can still run rings around most CCD scanners. The professional flatbeds are just now catching up in scan quality, but the cost of a new professional flatbed scanner is well over an order of magnitude higher than the used drum scanner whose performance it compares to. A used drum scanner is therefore still the biggest "bang for the buck" in film scanning.

    I'm just saying that there's seriously good equipment available, dirt cheap. And that's a reality that anyone thinking to make and sell film scanning equipment has to deal with.

    Bruce Watson

  6. #16
    bob carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario,
    Posts
    4,939

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    I am now close to purchase a Drum Scanner sometime this year, as Bruce points out two main contenders that I am considering.
    Aztek or ICG , I am now at the point where I believe they are both top end, both suited for my needs.

    My hesitation at this point is parts and service over the long haul. I have had my share of equipment not being supported. I am very close to a used ICG and was leaning this way but as Aztec is in NA I am starting to lean to this unit.
    Losing Jobo parts and service has really soured our thinking to a long distance relationship with any equipment we use on a daily basis.

    I am thinking a recent model that is refurbished and some training is the ticket and I will be getting quotes from both companies and doing a little bit more research to make a final decision.
    I have seen scans now from every imaginable type of scanner, and printed all of them to large magnifications.
    One observation: at 30x40 Lambda fujiflex high gloss at 400ppi , there is not much difference between all the scanners that we have tested, I have done two many tests thinking I was going to find one unit that completely blows away the other and to date not seen a significant quality increase.
    The drums do seem to have a slight edge in shadow detail, but very slight. Also the operator to end product has a significant quality effect.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Bruce, please don't feed the troll - our old friend Pablo is back...

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Seattle area, WA
    Posts
    1,328

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Quote Originally Posted by rob View Post
    Yes but without the vaporware feature.

  9. #19

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    Biggest issue in outsourcing scanning is the cost. Partially that is due to the expense of a professional level scanner, but it is also due to labor costs. If quality lab scanning costs dropped, then that might provide a bit of a lift in the market. I don't see the status quo changing.

    A couple issues for Kodak (CREO) with lower cost scanners. First is that the software is really good, but not beginner friendly. Second is that lower costs Kodak scanners using any technology in their higher spec gear would cannibalize sales at the high end.

    Kodak now sell all-in-one consumer scanner/printers. They could try an upscale model with the better CCD from their iQSmart series, maybe even combined with a better stepper motor set-up. Then offer an option of better software as an upgrade.

    Overall it is a big maybe. I don't agree with the $500 price point, because I think that is unrealistic, unless Kodak want to sell such a scanner at essentially no profit. Though maybe that would be the incentive. I know lots of professional photographers who would shoot more medium format film, given a more affordable scanning solution. It is harder to bill out scanning fees, without hiding that expense in the overall creative fee, so I do think there is a need.

    Ciao!

    Gordon Moat Photography

  10. #20
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    8,640

    Re: Figital Scanner Solution

    The premise is that Kodak should give away razors to incentivize people to keep buying blades. There's no other way to interpret Michael Sebastian's proposition, which is that they should sell a Nikon 9000-class scanner for $500, which is a quarter or a fifth of what a 9000 costs now.

    From a purely economic perspective the analysis becomes, what's the net present value of the additional film sales would you gain, vs how much of a loss you're going to incur developing and selling such a scanner at that price, and what's the net ROI of the combination.

    From an organizational psychology perspective, regardless of what the financial analysis says, there are probably high barriers right now to a business plan that requires a substantial upfront investment in a new product line that is expected to incur a loss, in the hope of enhancing the value of another, declining product line. Probably they're expecting each line to pay for itself.

Similar Threads

  1. Purchase drum Scanner or pay for scans
    By Dave Jeffery in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 31-Dec-2007, 16:53
  2. Old Formulas : Toners
    By Paul Fitzgerald in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2-Apr-2005, 09:35
  3. Old Formulas : Film
    By Paul Fitzgerald in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19-Mar-2005, 21:31

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •