Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site lll-crg.ARpA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gatech!seismo!lll-crg!renard
From: renard@lll-crg.ARpA (Paul Renard)
Newsgroups: net.graphics
Subject: Re: Film Recorders
Message-ID: <1004@lll-crg.ARpA>
Date: Tue, 19-Nov-85 16:44:43 EST
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.1004
Posted: Tue Nov 19 16:44:43 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Nov-85 04:08:00 EST
References: <471@sdchema.sdchema.UUCP> <648@dicomed.UUCP> <14752@onfcanim.UUCP> <651@dicomed.UUCP>
Reply-To: renard@lll-crg.UUCP (Paul renard)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG Group
Lines: 56
Keywords: Film Recorders.

It's worth the big bucks for a decent film recorder if you intend to make
film output of lasting and durable quality.  For quick turn-around
or throw-away slides, stick to the cheaper models.

I like Celco, except for the camera change mechanism.  If you do more than
one type of film format (35mm vs. 16mm, say) you have to mechanically move
the film plane.  I've seen focusing problems as a result.

I'm biased towards Dicomed (we have serial #1) but some problems to
look out for are:
	1. Best results for different film types requires separate optics
	   assemblies for each type.  At $30,000 a throw, that can get
	   expensive.  (We have 3 assemblies for doing 16mm, 35mm,
	   35mm-slide, and 4x5 sheet film.)
	2. For any recorder, make sure you have adequate controls for
	   proper color balancing.  The Dicomed  has several
	   controls that are set once (never correctly by the service
	   people - so be prepared for some agonizing months of 
	   adequately balancing your recorder).  We've noticed little
	   problem of color-drift once the recorder is set up properly.
	3. The software for controlling the recorder can be expensive
	   too.  Write your own!  (You can surely do a better job
	   and allow for more flexible data formats.)
	4. We produce 8x10's by enlarging our 4x5 film.  I've seen
	   8x10 enlargements from 35mm done offline on a 3M machine
	   that are quite acceptable.  Dicomed's 8x10 optics are not
	   quite up to snuff.  (To get enough light onto the film
	   requires 2-passes over the image, and thus increases the
	   time to plot so much that it becomes impractical to
	   produce 8x10.  I'm not particularly impressed with the
	   quality of Dicomed's 8x10 - Celco's is better - which
	   is surprising, since Dicomed's smaller formats are generally
	   better.)

	If you get a recorder of Dicomed's caliber, it's worth 
providing your own film processing, or make sure you have a good
photo lab available.  I've seen lots of potentially good film
produced on the recorder, but ruined by the photo lab.
	We just switched from our faithful Automax and Acme cameras
to Merron-Carrel.  It's too soon to judge the new camera but a few
things I've noticed:  The film magazine covers 'clip' shut, rather than
'screw' closed, so they open too easily at inopportune times.  The
same camera body is used for all roll film types - you just change
the aperture plate - and I'm expecting the aperture plate to eventually
wear out just from changing it.  They 'forgot' to put handles on
the camera body, so there is no convenient way to pick the bloody
thing up.  And we've had the camera installed for just over
two months, and it broke today!  (At the aperture mechanism!)
	My advice: Shop prudently.  Establish what kind of quality
you're expecting from film output.  And don't forget to consider
the cost of controlling software.  (And maintenance! - Dicomed
probably makes more money from maintenance contracts than from
sales of recorders!)

			That's all....
			P. Renard