🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct9.042204.17897@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs902125@ariel.yorku.ca (SHUK C YIP) writes:

>In article <1992Oct8.015051.2816@hp9000.csc.cuhk.hk> eva@next.csc.cuhk.hk (Eva Cheung) writes:
>>Are you using Film Recorder or Film Maker?  Any comments on Kodak's
>>products?  We'll use on both PC and Mac platform.  Do you have any
>>experience on these products?  Any advises are appreciated.  Thanks.

>I recommend Polaroid instead of Kodak. It was awarded by PC Magazine as
>Editor Choice. I use it daily with my Amiga. Certainly, it also supports
>PC and MAC. Two models are CI-3000 and CI-5000.

The Poloroid stuff is pretty good for the money, but because of the not
top of the line "flying spot" they use, they do not render true 4K
resolution.  They do scan 4,000 times all right, but since the flying spot
is physically larger than in the next price range of recorders, you get the
equivelent of something inbetween 2.5 and 3.0K resolution on 35mm.  I have
many critical customers that would notice the difference.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 Mac McDougald                   *
 The Photography Center          *   Any opinions expressed herein 
 Rm. 91 Comm. Bldg.              *   are not necessarily (actually,
 Univ. of Tenn. Knoxville 37916  *   are almost CERTAINLY NOT) those
 mac@ur.utk.edu                  *   of The University of Tennessee. 
 mac@utkvx.bitnet                *      
 (615-974-3449)                  *        
 (615-974-6435) FAX              *
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++