<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Underneath the Arches</title>
	<atom:link href="http://deptfordvisions.com/2010/02/underneath-the-arches/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://deptfordvisions.com/2010/02/underneath-the-arches/</link>
	<description>Photoblog from Deptford and SE London</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 13:43:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: skinnyvoice</title>
		<link>http://deptfordvisions.com/2010/02/underneath-the-arches/comment-page-1/#comment-194</link>
		<dc:creator>skinnyvoice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:38:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deptfordvisions.com/?p=2685#comment-194</guid>
		<description>The &lt;strong&gt;full &lt;/strong&gt;size images are between 50-100Mb tiffs! The images on the site are saved as 1000px square jpegs at 80% quality and average 200-400kb. The scanner is an Epson Perfection V750. Its about the least expensive 120 option available - the Nikon film scanner would be optimal but its about £2.5k :( 

I use the V750 with the holder from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/models/vseries.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Betterscanning&lt;/a&gt;, the Epson holder is very flimsy and doesn&#039;t inspire confidence. 

If you can, make the move to MF, I don&#039;t think you would regret it. You will need a scanner though!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <strong>full </strong>size images are between 50-100Mb tiffs! The images on the site are saved as 1000px square jpegs at 80% quality and average 200-400kb. The scanner is an Epson Perfection V750. Its about the least expensive 120 option available &#8211; the Nikon film scanner would be optimal but its about £2.5k <img src='http://deptfordvisions.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>I use the V750 with the holder from <a href="http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/models/vseries.html" rel="nofollow">Betterscanning</a>, the Epson holder is very flimsy and doesn&#8217;t inspire confidence. </p>
<p>If you can, make the move to MF, I don&#8217;t think you would regret it. You will need a scanner though!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Smith</title>
		<link>http://deptfordvisions.com/2010/02/underneath-the-arches/comment-page-1/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deptfordvisions.com/?p=2685#comment-193</guid>
		<description>Great series, perfectly suited to B&amp;W film.  In particular the wheelbarrow shot.  

The results you get are fantastic.  Even the full size images show hardly any grain.  You must have a really good scanner.

I&#039;m so tempted to move to medium format after seeing this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great series, perfectly suited to B&amp;W film.  In particular the wheelbarrow shot.  </p>
<p>The results you get are fantastic.  Even the full size images show hardly any grain.  You must have a really good scanner.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m so tempted to move to medium format after seeing this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
