Re: Sorry to ask again but...
Sandy, when Judy posted this, I had exactly the same question; but your comment makes perfect sense. I'm using the E2450, with its maddening film holders, and yes, I get fine DofF, if I use a holder or just lay the film on the glass. And to demonstrate this, I can relate a story. About month ago, because my father has just died, I moved his entire collection of 20,000 negs and slides back to Phoenix with me for cataloguing, scanning, rephotographing, and so forth. Along with them, I dragged a boxload of old prints that I need either to scan or rephotograph with 4x5 or 8x10. One of these turned out not to be a print at all, but a tintype of my grandfather, shot sometime between about 1880 and 1885. I scanned it so I could email it to a brother, and it turned out GREAT. This is no ordinary tintype. What somebody did to the poor thing over the years, I don't know, but it's buckled, and bent to hell. It even has two sharp punctures into it, that raised the tin surface more than 1/8th of an inch. Flat it is not. But the scan showed the entire thing in perfect focus. Clearly, then, the DofF on these scanners is deeper than a piece of film. Makes it tempting to try a few of those body-part scans people used to make by climbing onto the xerox machine back in the '70s. Or has Ender.dot.com been there already and back again? Mike On 29 Aug 2006 at 20:22, Sandy King wrote: Date sent: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:22:54 -0400 From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu> Subject: Re: Sorry to ask again but... To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca Send reply to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca > Judy, > > There are many different kinds of flatbed scanners and I don't know > where the place of best focus in on all of them. However, all of the > ones I have used appear to have the point of best focus not on the > surface of the glass of the scanner but at somewhere around .5mm to > 1mm from the top. That is suggested by various film holders > themselves. <snip>
|