Thanks Erik, but time on my hands is exactly what I don't have.
Given that Nikon doesn't make slide scanners anymore, can someone suggest a real-world solution? I'm
happy to read all the sucess stories with Nikons, but I need something I can buy new now. I don't
trust used precision scanning equipment. It's not like an Ampex 350, something I can fix.
-- Tom Fine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Dix" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 35mm slide scanner -- what's good these days?
> If you want to go old school and have a lot of time on your hand you could try to find a leafscan
> 35 or 45.
> We have a leafscan 45 with silverfast but a scan takes very long.
> Notre Dame Archives
> On 9/19/2012 7:54 AM, Tom Fine wrote:
>> I don't like e-books at all. Reading on the Kindle or iPad gives me a headache. I like printed
>> on paper, call me a fossil. When I download something in PDF, I always print it out and read it
>> paper. However, I'm not knocking the idea of scanned text, it's a tremendous resource. I don't
>> printing something out, especially if it's something that was previously rare or hard to find.
>> -- Tom Fine
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Don Cox" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 7:49 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 35mm slide scanner -- what's good these days?
>>> On 19/09/2012, Roger Kulp wrote:
>>>> As much as I love records, I would be happy to see the printed book go
>>> A well printed book with good typography, ideally using letterpress
>>> printing rather than offset, is a thing of beauty in itself.
>>> If you just want to read a text file from Gutenberg, I guess a Kindle is
>>> OK. I find the resolution too low - it can't handle pen drawings well.
>>> Don Cox
>>> [log in to unmask]