RE: OT - Imacon 848 vs Precision III
RE: OT - Imacon 848 vs Precision III
- Subject: RE: OT - Imacon 848 vs Precision III
- From: "Derek Cooper" <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 13:19:39 -0400
Additionally, the 848 is the first to introduce a batch attachment, is it
not? Nice thing about the 3F format is you can get a monkey to do the scans,
and then a skilled individual can come back and actually apply the
appropriate settings. Not only that, but it's sure to garner attention
sitting almost 2 feet high on your studio desk! :)
Cheers,
Derek Cooper
www.derekcooper.com
-----Original Message-----
From: bruce fraser
Sent: September 3, 2003 12:29 PM
At 11:55 AM -0400 9/3/03, email@hidden wrote:
>
<snip>The root of my question is mostly this: Does the active cooling
>
of the 848's CCD really make a discernable difference? Are there other
>
issues I'm not even taking into account?
Yes, the active cooling is what accounts for the actual difference in
dMax between the 848 and the Precision III.
Other issues: 848 offers higher resolutions, and it doesn't force you
to deal with SCSI.
Bruce
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.