Re: "Pepper grain" (was Minolta Multi Pro)

[rafe.bustin@xxxxxxxxxxx]

On 8 Apr 2002 at 18:43, Arthur Entlich wrote:

> This is just one reason to bring these matters up in a public forum. 
> Often people have no frame of reference as to what to expect from their 
> scanner, and it is only after they are made aware of known problems that 
> they start to look for whether their scanner is suffering.  It is 
> irrelevant if the person who informs them owns and uses the scanner or 
> not if the information is accurate.


Art, you're so full of BS it's hard to know where to begin.

The fact is, your information isn't accurate.  The banding is 
an extremely rare occurrence, but that's not something we'd 
ever learn from your reports on the subject.

The "penalty" is longer scan times.  To you, that's an un-
pardonable imposition, but apparently the owners of this 
scanner don't share your hysterical view on the matter.

The fact is, this scanner holds its own in several user-conducted 
studies of image sharpness and quality.  When presented with 
that evidence, you chose to distort and reinterpret it.

The fact is, in spite of its limited DOF (according to your reports) 
I have a client who has paid me several hundred dollars for a 
few dozen marvelously sharp scans of 6x7 cm. chromes, 
done with the standard, glassless carrier on my LS-8000.

The fact is, you've gone far beyond "educating" anybody on the 
subject of Nikon scanners.  It's clear to anyone with half a brain  
that you're involved in a personal vendetta against Nikon.  The 
information that you choose to divulge is completely selective -- 
it's divulged only so long as it discredits Nikon.

The notion that you're doing all this for the benefit of the scanning 
public is ludicrous.


rafe b.

-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.