"Dave Martindale" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Anyone who thinks that data from a linear CCD scanner
that scans the full width of the frame simultaneously is in any
way applicable to a drum scanner that illuminates and
measures only one point on the film at once is seriously out
to lunch.

Indeed, and even the (adjustable) size/shape of the scan spot will
change the MTF.

Bart

"Dave Martindale" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Anyone who thinks that data from a linear CCD scanner
that scans the full width of the frame simultaneously is in any
way applicable to a drum scanner that illuminates and
measures only one point on the film at once is seriously out
to lunch.

Indeed, and even the (adjustable) size/shape of the scan spot will
change the MTF.

Bart

"Dave Martindale" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Anyone who thinks that data from a linear CCD scanner
that scans the full width of the frame simultaneously is in any
way applicable to a drum scanner that illuminates and
measures only one point on the film at once is seriously out
to lunch.

Indeed, and even the (adjustable) size/shape of the scan spot will
change the MTF.

Bart

Jon Pike writes:

wrote in
:

Jon Pike writes:

wrote in
:

You're entirely missing the point. What all the digital supporters
seem to be saying is that, although they have no real basis for it,
they -think- that all the important information is being captured.

And what you're saying is that, although you have no real basis for
it, you -think- that important information is being lost.

No, I've seen results of tests

No, no, no, Jon! No fair using the plural here!

Yes, perfectly fair. He tested several things, so there were several tests
done.

What "several things"? The same piece of film, scanned and seen
through a microscope. Came up with two numbers that seem to you to be
the most important facts. No, the *only* important facts.

snip

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.

Jon Pike writes:

wrote in
:

Jon Pike writes:

wrote in
:

You're entirely missing the point. What all the digital supporters
seem to be saying is that, although they have no real basis for it,
they -think- that all the important information is being captured.

And what you're saying is that, although you have no real basis for
it, you -think- that important information is being lost.

No, I've seen results of tests

No, no, no, Jon! No fair using the plural here!

Yes, perfectly fair. He tested several things, so there were several tests
done.

What "several things"? The same piece of film, scanned and seen
through a microscope. Came up with two numbers that seem to you to be
the most important facts. No, the *only* important facts.

snip

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.