Re: FS4000 vs SS4000plus (thick fuji film base)

[Arthur Entlich <artistic-1@xxxxxxx>]

Even before these numbers came up, I was left with some incredulity 
about Polaroid's comments.

First off, I use almost exclusively Fuji slide films, and I have never 
noticed any of this, and I place the film in the scanner emulsion side down.

Secondly, the depth of field with this scanner is considerable, and I am 
quite surprised that the emulsion thickness or film thickness or both 
could be great enough to cause a focusing problem when the film 
curvature in a slide mount, which can be fairly substantial, is not 
enough to create a focusing problem.  Something is very odd here.

I'm not doubting that Howard and Jerry both experienced this situation, 
but there seems to be a need for a better explanation.

Art



gary wrote:

> Please let me know when you will be doing your Vegas act.
> 
> I was hoping another geek would do this, but alas, let's check the net and
> find the thickness of various slide films in 135-36:
> velvia rdp: 127um
> provia 100F rdpiii : 127um
> provia 400R rhpiii : 127um
> kodak e100s: 130um
> kodak e100vs: 130um
> 
> Well, looks like Polaroid was inhaling since the base thickness is virtually
> equal. How about print film?
> 
> Kodak portra 160vc: 130um
> 
> OK, now I know from experience that print film is not as thick as slide
> film. Something is fishy here! Maybe the "base" thickness is not the
> thickness of the film.
> 


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