Message-Id: <mailto:199408172006.PAA02131@library.wustl.edu> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 11:21:03 -0700 From: Raymond Lauzzana <mailto:lauzzana@NETCOM.COM> Subject: Re: [Q] Which Scanner for manuscripts To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB <mailto:IMAGELIB@ARIZVM1.BITNET>
Bob Rosenberg said:If you can scan them at the desired resolution and color depth, then there is no particular advantage to the camera.
I----------
I assume that you mean (photagraphic)(ie., chemical) camera. In which case I must say that you are wrong.
Firstly, the "slides" provide a second archival medium for a record. Secod/Second, they are inevitable a higher resolution than anything that you could dream of digitizing. The particale size /resolution of even 35mm film far exceeds the 4000 pixel resolution of "high-res " digitization. If you made 4x5 slides. The comparison would be so extreme that the comparison is sort of ridiculous. Third, the portability and ease of use. There are many circumstances in which 35mm slides are simply easier to use, ie., submissions for publication, presentations at conferences, etc. Fourth, 35mm slides are easier to get digitized than odd-sized paper. There are all sorts of slide scanners as was pointed out in previous discussions.