Peter Andrews

Hi Carl, we are in Australia and have an Arriscan XT (The newest model from Arri) and a Xena, a Cintel, and some LG scanners. If you want to shoot a test film, we will happily scan it and post the images for everyone to dissect.

I've sent you a message ?

They absolutely cherry-picked that sample. We scan prints on our Arriscan XT and our previous Arriscan and I have never, ever seen a result that poor. We also have Lasergraphics scanners and have not seen any real difference on print material of that magnitude in either direction. The Arriscan XT does have the latitude and the settings for print film, the original Arriscan was not designed for print film, but with the right settings did a stellar job anyway.

I know this is an old topic, but we have an Archivist, a Cintel V2 sprocketless and an Arriscan. Happy to create some samples of the same film on each if someone wants to send in a test film. The Cintel V2 still has fixed pattern noise, and isn't as sharp as the Arri, and is low resolution on 16mm. The Archivist does 5.5K on 16mm overscanned, and the Arri up to 6.5K, the scans on the Arri and and Archivist are noticeably better than on the Cintel. The sound module on the Cintel is however very good, both for optical and mag and is adjustable. One thing to note,. we have been informed by our French clients that the Cintel is not allowed to be used as the basis for any restoration projects that the CNC (The National Centre for Cinema and the Moving Image) funds as they consider the image quality not of a high enough standard.

I know this is an old thread, but there is an ArriXT and a Scanstation in Canberra that takes on commercial and amateur scanning jobs.