Mailinglist Archives:
Infrared
Panorama
Photo-3D
Tech-3D
Sell-3D
MF3D

Notice
This mailinglist archive is frozen since May 2001, i.e. it will stay online but will not be updated.
<-- Date Index --> <-- Thread Index --> [Author Index]

Re: XPan image scanner


  • From: Austin LIndsey <alindsey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: XPan image scanner
  • Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:20:27 -0500

Ted, etal Re: scans.

I have a Microtek Scanmaker IV (I believe the model V is now out). It
has a tray which inserts into the bottom (below the glass) for negative
and transparency scans.  Into the tray one uses an insert. I have
inserts for several formats, one for mounted slides (12) or one for 2,
6-frame film strips.  Since I use a Roundshot 35/35s and 360+ degrees is
the rule, I cut out the frame dividers in the film strip adapter.  As a
result I can scan one transparency or negative that is about 235 mm
(9.25" long. I could also "tape" the strip on the glass insert and scan
13" film strip.  Enough memory is the big hinderance.

One, 235 mm strip, at 2500 DPI, produces a file size of about 160 MB.
Lots of memory is needed to work a file this size. I have 526 MB and
plan to add 128 MB more.

Austin Lindsey
alindsey@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Joe McCary wrote:
> 
> I use a Epson 1200U photo scanner (with film adapter).  It has a film holder
> for 35mm that is 2 frames wide.  I find this a great scanner for the web but
> lacking for much beyond other than in-house inkjet prints. Since this is
> exactly what I bought it for I like it.  But a high end scanner it is NOT.
> 
> Joe McCary
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ted Baker" <ted@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <panorama-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 11:01 AM
> Subject: XPan image scanner
> 
> > Folks,  Does anyone know of a 35mm film scanner usable on a Macintosh that
> > will scan entire unmounted XPan images (negatives & transparencies) shot
> in
> > panoramic mode (24mm X 65mm) in one pass?  Since the image is a bit less
> > than twice as wide as a standard 35mm image, the image could be scanned in
> > 2 stages & stitched together since there would be some overlap but it
> would
> > be great if that step could be eliminated.
> > Ted
> >
> >