Any chance the SW can be made to scan 6x10? I just
aquired a Brooks Veriwide, whose image is 56x92.
Definitely not a common size (7 shots per roll of
120).
Pat
--- Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there anyone one the list that could send me a
sample exposed roll of
medium
I mis-spoke(wrote?) when describing a DOS portion of
the boot process. I should have said the POST portion
(power on self test) when hardware initializes prior
to OS loading. WinNT/2k/XP do not, in fact, have DOS
boot routines.
However, the scsi bios not loaded will not prevent
non-bootable scsi
I'm going to guess the original warning was to not send exposed or
unexposed; not processed or unprocessed.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: JackG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: X-ray scanners/etc
Hi Hersch,
It of course depends on the motherboard. Several
manufacturers in the retail market (e.g. Tyan,
Supermicro) do make motherboards with SCSI raid
options in which the raid controller handles the
processing. The IDE based raid options, to the best of
my knowledge, do not handle the processing. I
I'll jump in here.
Raid 0, striping, assigns half of the data to one
drive, the other half to the other drive. The writes
happen more or less simultaneuosly, so large file
operations happen in roughly half the time.
Raid 1 is, as you said, mirroring, where all data are
duplicated, so that if a
The Contax G1 can be purchased with the 35mm f2 lens,
and dedicated flash TLA200 for $799 new. The package
with the G2 uses the less expensive 45mm Tessar and
goes for over $1000. I know the G2 focusses faster and
I think has both active as well as passive AF. I think
the 45 is considered one of
Here you go:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/hardware_overvie
w.asp
Firewire is supported in both Home and Pro versions of XP.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 8:11 AM
Nikon is wrong. This is simply not the case with Windows NT/2K/XP, which all
evolved from the same core. Software can benefit from being optimized for
multiprocessors, but optimization is not necessary unless the software
vendor is using non standard calls into the OS. The hardware abstraction
Keep in mind that just because a sensor is smaller
than 24x36mm doesn't make your lenses obsolete. It
makes them telephoto, and comparatively high speed at
that. The 200 f2.8 might end up a 300 2.8, which can
costs thousands of dollars. It is all in how one lloks
at it. If I were a sports or
Maybe it's just my general punchiness at having only slept about 14 hours
this week, but I think it's damn funny that Anthony, who won't touch his
computer configuration for fear of disrupting a known state, finds it odd
that professional photographers will limit risk when going on assignment by
I didn't say that foreign labs are inferior. I said the 'home' lab is a
known quantity. I didn't say that the film bought on location was inferior,
I said it's condition wasn't known, whereas film brought along out of a
purchase made locally is a controlled variable. Yes, risk is introduced by
Plenty of groups do work once and get paid forever. For example: inventors
who license their patent, actors who earn residuals, songwriters, authors. I
think anyone in a creative field basically has that benefit.
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Harvey
Austin, I think you miss the point here: Anthony's
standards for film processing quality are sufficiently
lower than yours, mine and everyone else on the list,
that all processors' work is fungible. It isn't that
all are equal.
Personally, I don't like getting scratched, mistreated
film back.
One reason that fairly leaps to mind is being familiar
with the particular lot (batch) of film brought, as
well as knowing how it has been handled.
Pat
--- Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Buy film at your destination, and have it developed
there before you return.
Unless you are
One of the things that amazes me about Ed's work is
that, technically speaking, it is Vuescan that's
included in the Vueprint license.
Pat
--- Alan Tyson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
As a *viewer*, Ed Hamrick's *Vueprint* is pretty
well
unbeatable, and it's included in the Vuescan
I have had great results scanning Sura 400 with both a
Canon 2710 and Minolta Scan Elite. I really like this
as my general purpose film, in fact.
Pat
--- John Matturri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a number of supra 400 images that I will need
to get
decent scans of. Using my SS4000 I get
Good luck getting a DNA computer to run WinNT4 or
SCSI.
--- Tim Atherton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I want to know when they are going to get those DNA
based computers they've
been working on up and running? (seriously...)
tim a
- Original Message -
From: Johnny Deadman [EMAIL
Another reason why ACDSee doesn't deal with 48 bit files, where PSPro and
others do is that 48 bit TIFF is a format used for image editing, not
strictly viewing, which is what ACDSee is designed for.
That's just my guess, anyway.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL
I bought a used Microtek Snamaker 45t last week, and
have been having a bear of a time getting it working
on my Win2K machine. So much so that I built a Win NT4
machine today. But though it is intermittently sort of
working more than it did under W2k, it still isn't
working properly. If anyone
Spoken like a man who has seen galley proofs!
--- Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The October issue of MacWorld will have several film
scanners reviewed.
Watch for it on your news stand!
David
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what are event viewer
logs and where are they?
Event Viewer logs are (not surprisingly) logs of
events (sorry, I cna't think of a better general
description) grouped by type of event. NT and W2k do
this in the background, and logs are created for
System, Security,
Is there any info about the problem reported in the
Event Viewer logs?
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Running into major problems installing my new LS
4000 scanner on my PC.
Running windows 2000 professional and cannot seem to
get my scanner to scan
although it does preview the image
I just aquired a Microtek 45T scanner, but it did not
come with the Microtek CD. I have Vuescan, so I'm not
out of luck. But if anyone on the list has the CD, I
would appreciate a copy, if at all possible. Please
contact me directly at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pat
The only Windows SW available there is the Win 3.1
version (!)
Pat
--- Shough, Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just aquired a Microtek 45T scanner, but it did
not
come with the Microtek CD. I have Vuescan, so I'm
not
out of luck. But if anyone on the list has the CD,
I
would
Okay, so buy a $100 Broadband router/switch. You plug the internet
connection into it, and it does the routing necessary for any computers
attached.
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 5:39 AM
Subject: Re:
Anthony, since you seem dead set against any low cost way to add scanning
hardware for the Nikon, why not just upgrade your present PC to Win2K and
add the included FireWire card? If you're worried that the speed of your
computer will degrade (which, in my experience isn't the case with Nt4 to
Performing an upgrade install of Win2K would take
about an hour. Since you back up your system (I
presume that's what you are doing with your tape
drive), the risk of a failed upgrade is zero. The
overdrive processor will give you a substantial
performance increase (60% higher clock rate, coupled
Performing an upgrade install of Win2K would take
about an hour. Since you back up your system (I
presume that's what you are doing with your tape
drive), the risk of a failed upgrade is zero. The
overdrive processor will give you a substantial
performance increase (60% higher clock rate, coupled
Well I guess installing a new scanner is out of the question, then.
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I cannot risk any change that will diminish the reliability of the system.
_
Do You Yahoo!?
For the record, the HP Photosmart Scanner S20 does use USB under Win NT 4.
Not that it is a comparable substitute for the LS 4000.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have USB, and Windows NT is not
I guess I'm a little confused on the source of the dilemma. You are
frustrated at the rapid obsolescence in computer equipment and software,
which is certainly your right. Things *do* change quickly. And as they
change, things previously not possible become so only because they make
something
Well, if ICE isn't a critical requirement, why not look at the Polaroid (or
the Canon, which has an equivalent to ICE, and scans at 4000 dpi) which
several people have suggested? And why, if the Nikon is required do you
resist the suggestions for a second machine solely for supporting the
Spoken like a true gentleman!
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Austin Franklin wrote:
Of course, the loupe-heads will be
unhappy with a 100 dpi image, but, if it is a large format print, only
bad manners says you should be scrutinizing it at
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pat writes:
I guess I'm a little confused on the source
of the dilemma. You are frustrated at the rapid
obsolescence in computer equipment and software,
which is certainly your right.
Yes. What is confusing
Art, a very good response here. And where you mention the Polaroid and it's
possible risk due to corporate financial concerns, you can also purchase the
Microtel version of the scanner, which other than firmware and possibly the
QC grade of the CCD is the same hardware as the Polaroid (but the
I used to own the Canoscan 2710 and still recommend it highly. I used it
mostly with Vuescan, because that interface made more sense. Someone else
mentioned that it gets middling to poor reviews, but that was not my
experience with it, and part of why I bought it was the rave in Shutterbug
/webbox/bw.072601/212070488.htm
- Original Message -
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Photoshop 5 LE files darker than they look
Pat Perez wrote:
I've been looking forward to getting PS E
I guess it is a matter of semantics when faced with the imaging sensor(s)
you describe. In the strictest sense, the aforementioned sensors would be 4
pixels, since a pixel is literally a picture element, indeed. But in
practical terms, they form 1 RGB pixel, which is all that matters for color
Is the Vuescan multi sample scanning on the Epson multiple pass or single
pass?
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Brian D. Plikaytis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm using the Epson 1640 with it's transparency adapter to scan my 4x5
black
and white negs. I find it is doing a fairly good job and
Sorry to be late chiming in, but a few options I haven't seen anyone
recommend are commercial digital archiving, or commercial media storage. If
you have your images in digital form, I imagine it wouldn't be hard to find
a data storage company to archive it for you under controlled conditions,
I apologize for this being somewhat disconnected, as I replaced my PC
yesterday, and don't have the original message to which I am replying.
Someone had asked about the Sony 420 monitor's ability to adjust color
channels from the front panel. I answered that my 420GS doesn't but I just
noticed
I own a Sony 19 420GS monitor, so if you can explain to me how to tell,
I'll be happy to find the answer.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: JimD
Excuse this off topic post
It is astounding to me how hard it is to get details on some
computer products.
I'm looking to get two
Strictly speaking, what Win 3.x through Me consider 'system resources' are a
fixed amount of memory regardless of how much system memory you have. I seem
to recall that in 3.x it was two 64K heaps and increased in 95, where it has
stayed the same until Me. These heaps control how many environment
I was proceeding from the thought that the band was
the result of 'accumulated bits' (my own term, just
made up) but someone posted a very knowledgeable note
that pretty much put the kibosh on my theory. I'm just
an armchair coder, and defer to the explanation of why
my suggestion probably was
I'm on my third film scanner, and have never bought
the same brand twice, but this was certainly not due
to dissatisfaction with the product's reliability. It
is more due to the product selection/price at each
purchase. I started out with an original HP Photosmart
scanner and moved up to a Canon
This is a wild-ass guess, but maybe memory at the byte level isn't being
accessed or allocated or released properly, and what appears as a band is
the result of regular 'overflows'.
- Original Message -
From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've found something out. Thanks to
This makes it sound more like a software issue. I would further bet that the
number of pixels between band peaks is evenly divisible by 8. It also makes
me think I was on the right track with my earlier guess. It sounds like the
samples aren't completely being reset to zero before another sample
And none are as good as Contax with Zeiss g
Pat
--- Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whoa! Gentlemen, please!! Scanner wars are as
fruitless as Mac vs. PC and
Nikon vs Canon and both vs Leica.
Regards
Tony Sleep
__
Do You
The print ad specified the transparency adapter was included (at least here
in Los Angeles), but the web site version of the ad doesn't make the same
claim.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 03:58 PM 7/16/01 -0600, Stan wrote:
This weekend's circular from
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 18:19:28 -0700 Pat Perez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
the
most infamous being 3rd party manufacturer video drivers
Yup! Absolutely (one reason why I conservatively stick to Matrox is that -
eventually anyhow - their drivers usually get to be well
Since you're using W2K, what does the Event Viewer say? In my experience
with Win NT/2K, many repeatable errors can be diagnosed with info from the
event viewer logs, and frequently are the result of driver conflicts, the
most infamous being 3rd party manufacturer video drivers (video drivers
I believe the attachment Jack mentioned was the copied
text from the other ASF employee, a posting to the
LivePix newsgroup detailing the issues with dithering
routines.
Pat
--- Mark T. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't see anything attached to the post either..
As a 1270 owner who hasn't
The first place I'd look for the file would be the Recycle Bin. It may have
been deleted accidentally and gone there.
When do you get this error? (I mean, launching which program)
- Original Message -
From: Stewart Musket [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 22,
If it is any encouragement, I've heard of an outfit
somewhere that re-spools 120 onto 620 rolls. Sadly, I
don't know the name, but at least you know the search
won't be in vain.
Pat
--- Richard Starr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- You wrote:
The Super Six-20 was a folding camera, if I'm not
The connector for Macs and PCs is the same physically,
but the pinout or timing is slightly different (think
different!), but the good news is that almost all but
the lowliest budget monitors come with the Macintosh
connector adapter in the box. I am 99% certain the
Mitsubishi would (and I really
This is specious experience to say the least, but I
looked at the output (in the form of the sample book,
and what Olympus likely feels is flattering to the
product) from the Olympus at the store the other day
and I was seriously underwhelmed by the quality of
it's output. Images were uniformly
I haven't had prints done by Bill, but at a trade show
last year I saw examples of his work, and can
absolutely vouch for the quality of his output. He had
huge prints displayed made from originals ranging from
35mm up to 5x7. Once I have some good scans worthy,
he'll be doing my big prints.
Pat
It absolutely works well with Vuescan. In fact, I rarely used the Canon
scanning software with it, the performance under Vuescan being so good.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: j n [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had assumed that the FS2710 was too expensive, but
you're right, I guess it's now
Keep in mind that 1200x1200 is about 80% fewer pixels than 2700x2700. Also,
since you mentioned that you are describing jpg file size, that the
different applications may be using differing levels of jpg compression.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Lynn Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Actually, Nikon has the Coolscan 8000, and Polaroid is now also shipping
(it's name escapes me) a medium format, 4000 dpi scanner. The Nikon has the
ASF ICE^3 suite.
Pat
- Original Message -
From: Laurie Solomon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I believe you may be mistaken or misinformed. The
I recently sold my Canoscan 2710 in order to make way
for a new film scanner. I am strictly an amatuer
photographer, so in shopping for a new scanner, I have
less need for a high volume production model than a
high image quality model, though more of each is
better.
My initial survey of the
This is very interesting news indeed. Are these ASF
functions from the Nikon SW, or Ed's own work-alikes?
In any case, I've been very pleased with Vuescan since
I started using it with my HP Photosmart (incredible
improvement with Vuescan over HP's software), but must
admit I know very little of
When I questioned whether Ed's version of ROC and GEM
were his own algorithm's or ASF's, I certainly didn't
intend anyone to think that I was suggesting that he
copied their proprietary methods. I was asking whether
he was using software 'hooks' from Vuescan to access
that capability in resident
I just resubscribed to the list today after months of ISP problems. Would
someone please forward (off list) to me the Coolscan 4000 review mentioned
in this thread or point me to an archive where I can find it?
Thanks,
Pat
- Original Message -
From: "Dave King" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
64 matches
Mail list logo
