RE: filmscanners: Nikonscan 3.1.1 update
Does anybody succeded installing it? I have downloaded it twice and something like "bad CRC" message occured when installing it on my machine. Vlad -Pvodn zprva- Od: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]za uivatele Mikael Risedal Odeslno: 20. listopadu 2001 14:50 Komu: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pedmt: filmscanners: Nikonscan 3.1.1 update There is a new Nikonscan 3.1.1 out today go to nikon homepage Mikael Risedal _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- Pchoz zprva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.298 / Virov bze: 161 - datum vydn: 13.11.2001 --- Odchoz zprva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.298 / Virov bze: 161 - datum vydn: 13.11.2001
RE: filmscanners: URL: Nikonscan 3.1.1 update
- Go to thr LS4000 scanner and next to Nikonscan 3.1.1 Little bit faster, better memory handling. etc Mikael Risedal - Mikael, I have downloaded it twice, both versions were corrupted and could not be installed (PC). Because both were identical (compared byte by byte) I assume that something is wrong with the file on the web not with the transfer. How did you go through the installation, no problem? Vlad --- Odchoz zprva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.298 / Virov bze: 161 - datum vydn: 13.11.2001
RE: filmscanners: Canon 4000 scanner VS Nikon LS4000
I agree with you Bill absolutely. LS IVED behaves in the same way. I agree with units you mentioned - which applied to real word mean to measure via the software uneveness of film position in the holder which must not be more than 12 units and to put focus in the middle. If the number is higher than app. 12 focus units I have to go with glass. Generally better eveness I get with stripes than with single frames but that is logical. My 0,02$ Vlad -- . o I have a number of these slides where the Nikon cannot produce sharp scans across the entire image. o The NikonScan software lets me place the focus point anywhere on the image I like, and will give me razor sharp scans at that point. However other regions of the image will consequently become blurry. o When you manually set the focus point (by clicking the preview image where you want the scanner to focus), the scanner will focus at that point and report a number. By clicking around you can compare the various focus numbers. o Regions that are within 6 focus units of the focus point (the scanner just gives a number, doesn't say whether this represents microns, angstroms, or what) will be substantially as sharp as at the focus point. o Regions that are 12 units different from the focus point will be noticeably blurry. o I have not done as much work with negative strips as I have with slides. I do see some focus variation across negative images but so far it doesn't seem as bad as for my most-curved slides. --Bill -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://billfernandez.com == --- Príchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.298 / Virová báze: 161 - datum vydání: 13.11.2001 --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.298 / Virová báze: 161 - datum vydání: 13.11.2001
RE: filmscanners: Canon 4000 ppi film scanner
I would say the truth is somewhere in the middle. Scanning freshly developed film without ICE and using e.g. tablet (even the cheapest) wil typically take me just few minutes - frequently less than one. Using appropriate software (e.g. Pentools/pen duster -bonus software for Graphire) will further speed up the process. On the other hand quite sufficient for prolonging this time to x-time more minutes is to take out and put back the stripe from plastic cover. Doing this 2-3 times and scratches are already there. Even leaving it in for few days and only then scaning will complicate my life (static electricity?). Retouching the scratches along the picture on a blue gradient sky is sometimes night mare. Not to mention the uneveness in film emulsion which sometimes occur which is really time consuming to retouch. On the other hand use of ICE will soften somewhat the picture but not in terms of resolution but in terms of contrast. I made small personal test scanning the negative with resolution chart. With ICE the visible resolution was 65 lpmm without it 65 as well - but with lower contrast (Nikon LSIV) and less apparent grain. This might be sometimes advantage sometimes not. I think the usefullness of ICE is closely related to the system of work with films and here everybody has to find his own way. Vlad Tom's statement is completely contrary to my experience. I 've used the SS4000 for about a year and a half and I don't spend on average 2 minutes cloning dust spots or scratches. To this point, I wouldn't have used the infrared channel even if I had it. Regards, Ron Carlson - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 6:53 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Canon 4000 ppi film scanner I'm still at this junction struggling between choosing SS4000 or FS4000, although for about 90% settled for SS4000. I do not want to say that FS4000 is better choice but IMO scanner without infrared channel is just a mistake. You will spend hours on dust and scratches removing. Tom __ Do You Yahoo!? Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com --- Príchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.293 / Virová báze: 158 - datum vydání: 29.10.2001 --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.293 / Virová báze: 158 - datum vydání: 29.10.2001
RE: filmscanners: Nikon Scan 3 - Digital ICE
With clean film, ICE shouldn't have anything to do. Regards Tony Sleep Tony there IS a difference - less apparent grain and slightly less contrast at highest picture frequencies (app. 60 lp/mm). Whole picture is affected. Vlad --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.256 / Virová báze: 129 - datum vydání: 31.5.2001
RE: filmscanners: RE: Nikon LS-40 Coolscan 4
- Original Message - From: James Grove [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 10:44 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: RE: Nikon LS-40 Coolscan 4 Umm when the motors move i cant say its really noisey just loader than my Minolta was! You can here the motors whirring (is that a word?) when you put the film adaptors in. Hi James - comparing these 4 scanners I took HP S20 as a standard, Minolta Elite much more quiet, Minolta Dual II - noisy (quick transport) noisier than S20 but less than Elite at normal scan, LS 40 between Elite and Dual II. Sounds for me it makes music using different modes Autofocus, exposure and normal scan which is pleasant to my ears. Vlad --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.256 / Virová báze: 129 - datum vydání: 31.5.2001
RE: filmscanners: LS-4000 - Nikon Scan 3.0 crashes under Win98 SE
The problem is that the Nikon scanner software (Nikon Scan 3.0) constantly crashes, especially when I try to use ICE or other advanced features. I'm running Windows 98 Second Edition. Any ideas what might be wrong? Yes I think these are known problems. Though I do not have LS 4000 but Coolscan IV it uses the same soft. Mine crashes mostly when cropping is used. However it never crashed when used as plugin to Photoshop... Also it is very sensitive to another applications running in the background (Corel, Outllok, IE Explorer) especially when switching back to Nikonscan window (W98 SE PII 450 MHZ 380 MB RAM). Scanner color space doesn't work properly with GEM and not only with it, cropping as mentioned is problem, previewing image with ICE set on only - making the tonal correction and then switching to GEM not ROC will involve ROC as well - you have to redraw the picture to get the correct colors - which is time consuming , LCH editor Chroma option doesn't work even when on screen is everything OK etc. I am eagerly looking forward for the patch. Vlad --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.256 / Virová báze: 129 - datum vydání: 31.5.2001
RE: filmscanners: LS4000 slide removed from mount
I just measured the FH-2 holder with a vernier calliper. Each frame opening is 23.5mm wide, 35.5mm long -- that means it's masking .25mm of each edge of the image. What size openings does the FH-3 holder have? 24.1 x 36.0 mm as I measured it. Extra 0,5 mm will be useful - it is rather difficult to position the film precisely Vlad --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.256 / Virová báze: 129 - datum vydání: 31.5.2001
RE: filmscanners: Negatives vs. slides in new scanners
Maris wrote: I have now tried Kodak Supra 400 and, on the LS-30 at 2700spi it scans better than average but I would not consider it exceptional. I still have grain in blue skies and, My experience with Supra 400 is very good. Very little grain-alliasing no matter in which channel (skin, sky, greens) - especially absence in blue channel surprised me most. I wouldn't believe that this is 400 ISO film. Scanned with Dual II 2820 DPI. Vlad --- Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.250 / Virová báze: 123 - datum vydání: 18.4.2001
RE: filmscanners: USB and data transfer as a constraint on time needed to scan
I work both with Elite/SCSI and Dual II/USB and I see very little difference (if any) in scan speed. Each will take app. 3 minutes for full res scan (With ICE in case of Elite). My machine is Celeron 450 with 320MB memory, scan time was measured with freshly restarted WIN98SE and no app. running in the background. Minlota's tech spec. indicates 45 s (Elite) - but I did never even come close to this number. With very dark negatives it grows up to even more than double (6 minutes) and I can hear how the scanner radically slows down - so I suppose (IMHO) neither transfer channel nor the speed of computer (at least 450 MHz Celeron) is an significant issue. With my old HPS20 (2400 DPI) which was also USB - but I think it didn't have variable exposure, these times were constant - app. 1 min. 40 secs for full scanwrite to the disk. Vlad -Puvodn zprva- Od: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]za uivatele shAf Odeslno: 26. nora 2001 6:05 Komu: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Predmet: Re: filmscanners: USB and data transfer as a constraint on time needed to scan paul writes ... The new Nikon and Minolta scanners use USB rather than SCSI to communicate with the computer. Since USB has a lower data transfer rate than SCSI, I was wondering wether this makes any difference for the overall amount of time needed to complete a scan. Is data transfer speed the limiting constraint on the amount of time needed to complete a scan, or is there some other aspect of the scanning process that constrains speed? ... I would believe a scanner is faster than USB, but not by much. The primary time constrant should be that of exposure ... that is, image brightness values are more dependent on what the CCD needs for integrating the signal, rather than how fast the data can be sent to the computer. shAf :o) --- Prchoz zprva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.231 / Virov bze: 112 - datum vydn: 12.2.2001 --- Odchoz zprva neobsahuje viry. Zkontrolovno antivirovm systmem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz). Verze: 6.0.231 / Virov bze: 112 - datum vydn: 12.2.2001
