[geeks] What has replaced Kodak PhotoCD Pro?

[Mike Parson]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 12:13:23PM -0400, Francois Dion wrote:
> On 7/7/05, Mike Parson <mparson at bl.org>wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 05:14:05PM -0400, Francois Dion wrote:
> [...]
>>> Well, there also used to be the Photo CD which offered 2048x3072 and
>>> Photo CD Pro which clocked in at 4096x6144. Apparently I've been
>>> under a rock and the Photo CD/Pro service is no longer available
>>> from Kodak,
>
> [...]
>
>>> Or is there an inexpensive negative and/or slides scanner out there
>>> that rivals the quality that the Kodak PhotoCD Pro did (4400dpi)?
>>
>> Dunno about inexpensive, but I've used the Nikon Coolscan film
>> scanners and scanned in a bunch of my old film at ~2400 dpi, but the
>> scanner is capable of up to 4000dpi.  Even at 2400, it was scanning
>> at a higher resolution than the film itself (at least my iso 400
>> stuff).
>
> I have a lot of outdoor iso 100 high quality film, shot thru 28 and
> 45 mm Zeiss lenses. I dont want to have to scan them more than once,
> so I'll use the higher rez. My wife shoots almost entirely digital
> (she does photo and graphic design) but I cant afford another high end
> digital rig... So I'll stay with SLR and rangefinders for right now,
> as long as I have a way to go from 35mm to digital quickly. That's
> what I liked about 1hr photocd... Beside, short of medium format with
> digital back, you cant match the quality. Not with a Canon Digital
> Rebel or Fuji Finepix Pro S2 anyways.
>
>> The one I used was SCSI, but these days, they seem to come in USB2
>> and IEEE1394 (firewire) models too.  Plus having the built-in
>> hardware DigitalICE/ROC/GEM, you can get some extemely nice scans,
>> even out of older negatives.
>
> The Nikon dont use CCD, they use 4 pass at R,G,B and IR, right? I have
> an older 2400dpi (optical) scanner, but it doesn't look anything like
> a photocd pro capture.

IIRC, it was a 4 pass, like I said, been a while.

>> They can be pricey though, especially if you opt for the roll-film
>> adapter, and/or slide feeder.  Makes bulk scanning MUCH easier, but
>> they do add to the cost quite a bit.
>>
>> Wish I could afford one, unfortunately the one I used before was a
>> borrowed unit and had to give it back. =)
>
> Do you still shoot film?

Don't shoot much at all any more, but when I do, it's digital.  I still
have stuff I never got scanned, plus lots of stuff my parents did when I
was younger.

-- 
Michael Parson
mparson at bl.org