DSLR scanning vs Dedicated flatbed scanning.

[faberryman]

I just knew he was going to post that bell image.

[Pere Casals]

How many scans of 135, 120 and 4x5 have you ever made on an X5?

I edited hundreds of X5 and Imacon scans, mostly from 35mm Velvia, which is the situation where an X5 shines.

For BW and color negative 4x5" it does not shine at all.

For 4x5" velvia the X5 can be interesting if wanting to recover very deep shadows.

And if you have, why do you constantly repost the same clickbait, flawed/ warped tests & useless comparisons?

IMHO the side by side tests made by Pali are very honest and enlight a lot.

Also editing the crops in the Collaborative Scanner Comparisson https://www.largeformatphotography.i...an-comparison/ it's really meaningful.

We are talking about reliable information. Pali is not exactly beginner in scanning, while people that made the "Collaborative" are masters of their tools.

To me those examples are Facts, discredit those facts if you are able...

[Pere Casals]

I just knew he was going to post that bell image.

You suggested it... No opinion about the Image Quality of the crop of a 6m elargement?

[faberryman]

You suggested it... No opinion about the Image Quality of the crop of a 6m elargement?

Actually I suggested that you don't show it, but that would have required that you read my post.

[Pere Casals]

Actually I suggested that you don't show it, but that would have required that you read my post.

So no comment about the image quality of the crop...

[interneg]

So Pere, let's be clear, have you scanned anything other than 35mm transparency on an Imacon?

Secondly, I was not referring to Pali's excellent tests (which you have spent a great many posts trying to misrepresent the evidence he gathered) but to your whataboutery whenever you are directly challenged to show personal evidence of your exceptional claims. You have not yet answered the question about why you pick & choose evidence from the filmscanner.info resolution test rather than dealing with the totality. Is it because doing so would destroy the fallacy you have spun?

[faberryman]

So no comment about the image quality of the crop...

I replied a couple of years ago. I don't have anything new to add. And I am not interested in going down that rabbit hole with you again.

[Audii-Dudii]

Excuse me.

I naively contributed to what I thought was a new thread and didn't realize it was actually the continuation of a long-running drama.

I'm relatively new here and don't wish to step on anyone's toes, so I'm just going to show myself out and y'all can carry on...

Cheers!

[Pere Casals]

So Pere, let's be clear, have you scanned anything other than 35mm transparency on an Imacon?

Secondly, I was not referring to Pali's excellent tests (which you have spent a great many posts trying to misrepresent the evidence he gathered) but to your whataboutery whenever you are directly challenged to show personal evidence of your exceptional claims. You have not yet answered the question about why you pick & choose evidence from the filmscanner.info resolution test rather than dealing with the totality. Is it because doing so would destroy the fallacy you have spun?

interneg, let's be clear:

X5 yields under 2000 dpi effective for 4x5, a shame for a $16,000 machine. A 8000pix sensor for a 4" width will never yield more than 2000dpi effective, but well under.


let's be clear:

a cheap V850 for 4x5" resolves more than 2000dpi effective, 2900 in the Hor and 2300 in the vert. It also makes 8x10".


let's be clear:

Pali's tests discredit you. Also the crops in the Collaborative scanner tests discredit you.


let's be clear:

Some of you go to personal attack and lies where you have no technical arguments:
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1504824
https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1505192


let's be clear:

I've no commercial interest, so also no need to say lies to customers. Some here are in a different situation

[Pere Casals]

Excuse me.

I naively contributed to what I thought was a new thread and didn't realize it was actually the continuation of a long-running drama.

I'm relatively new here and don't wish to step on anyone's toes, so I'm just going to show myself out and y'all can carry on...

Cheers!

Don't worry, a scanner riot was my welcome party in this forum, at that time by I was not prepared to deal with such kind of people.

Now it's different, it's pure fun to allow them discredit on their own.

Here interneg has to say that 2000 samples per inch (1725dpi effective, a shame) are pure gold. LOL


BTW, the good prints are those crafted with an enlarger by a sound printer, this is what I'm learning to do.