Fw: RE: Scanner < $1500 selection ?

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:25:29 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from Mail6.sc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA24107
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:32:06 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from noel770 ([24.31.210.251]) by Mail6.sc.rr.com  with 
Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.357.35);
 Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:31:49 -0400
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:32:02 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-UIDL: 4f315b168d95641af5f4128e3f1366b6
Subject: RE: Scanner < $1500 selection ?


> I'm a new Nikon LS-2000 owner.  I'm trying to decide
> whether to keep the scanner or send it back because
> I've had a lot of trouble with it.
> ...

If I were you, I would visit Nikon's tech support site
(http://www.nikontechusa.com), and see if the volume of complaints has
dropped any in the past year.  At the time, the LS-2000 was notorious 
for
failing stepper motors.  It was a nice concept condemned by poor
engineering.

If, as I suspect, they haven't eliminate the stepper motor design 
problems,
go for the Polaroid SS4000.  Especially since it includes Lasersoft's
software now.

--- Noel


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:25:20 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from portal.dx.net (portal.dx.net [199.190.65.2])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA21204
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 02:16:20 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from FWPHOTO (ss181.lrbcg.com [206.162.40.181])
by portal.dx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA25228
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:31:07 
-0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <005801c03a33$343b0480$b528a2ce@FWPHOTO>
From: "Frank Wiewandt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:15:05 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
X-UIDL: b3c8a44d1d9fbb3ed3af4294ec43e07e
Subject: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

Richard,

Thanks for your reply.

> VueScan will give you full bit depth from your hardware plus very 
good
> correction for each film type -- especially important with color
> negatives. Photoshop corrections will be easier and faster and you 
can
> do them to 16 bit RGB data before you reduce to 8 bit.

I was wondering about this. I knew that the 1200S scanned in 
16(12?)bit,
but outputted in 8bit through the Twain plug-in. Getting 16bit info 
into
PS alone is more than worth the price. Especially if you've got PS6.

Anything else? (Am I being greedy? :-)

Regards,

Frank Wiewandt


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: Windows 2000 photoshop 5.5 problem

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:25:14 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection7: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection8: X
Received: from femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com 
[24.0.95.82])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA15750
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:47:50 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from brads ([24.176.172.31]) by femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com
  (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP
  id <20001020004737.IQQ28428.femail2.sdc1.sfba.home.com@brads>
  for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
  Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:47:37 -0700
Message-ID: <001b01c03a2f$a4c3c060$0b01a8c0@brads>
Reply-To: "Brad Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Brad Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:44:02 -0600
Organization: very little
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_NextPart_000_0022_01C039CA.42956D40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-UIDL: 873f705c194449fad32e1ec02aea49c5
Subject: Windows 2000 photoshop 5.5 problem

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--=_NextPart_000_0022_01C039CA.42956D40
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I have windows 2000, PhotoShop 5.5 and a Nikon Ls 2000 scanner.  I can 
=
scan using the Nikon 2.5.1 software alone without any problems.  It a =
use the PhotoShop twain acquire I get errors when logged on as a user. 
  =
If I change my privileges to administrator everything works fine.  I =
have use regedt32 and given myself and powerusers full rights to all =
Kodak, Nikon and adobe software.  What I am I missing.

Thanks=20

Brad Nelson

--=_NextPart_000_0022_01C039CA.42956D40
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








I have windows 2000, PhotoShop 5.5 and 
=
a Nikon Ls=20
2000 scanner.  I can scan using the Nikon 2.5.1 software alone =
without any=20
problems.  It a use the PhotoShop twain acquire I get errors when 
=
logged on=20
as a user.   If I change my privileges to administrator =
everything=20
works fine.  I have use regedt32 and given myself and powerusers =
full=20
rights to all Kodak, Nikon and adobe software.  What I am I=20
missing.
 
Thanks 
 
Brad Nelson

--=_NextPart_000_0022_01C039CA.42956D40--


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200U for Transparency

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:24:52 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from murphys-outbound.servers.plus.net ([212.159.14.225])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA02548
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:45:18 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 21385 invoked from network); 19 Oct 2000 23:45:10 
-
Received: from unknown (HELO oemcomputer) (212.159.46.121)
  by murphys with SMTP; 19 Oct 2000 23:45:10 -
Message-ID: <001301c03a27$5603d080$792e9fd4@oemcomputer>
From: "Bob Armstrong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:50:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-UIDL: bc2c0199cfb93aa78c8d66125e22f6e1
Subject: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200U for Transparency

On Thursday, October 19, 2000, Ed Hamrick wrote


> In a message dated 10/18/2000,  [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I'm having a problem scanning large (eg A4) areas at 1200dpi and 
I've
> >  reported this to Ed.  I'm using W98SE with 256MB RAM.

> This is a fairly simple problem.  A 1200 dpi scan of the whole 
scanning
> area is 8.5 x 1200 * 11.7 * 1200 * 24 / 8 = 430 MBytes.
>
> VueScan allocates this 430 MByte area from the paging file.
> Go into the "Advanced" tab of the "System properties"
> on Windows 2000 and click "Performance Options".
> Increase the size of virtual memory to at least 600 MBytes.
>

Ed,

Using W98SE, I let Windows manage my virtual memory and there is 
something
over 9 GB on drive C.  I saved a file of 8.5 by 11.7 inches at 1200dpi 
from
Photoshop and it created a 409MB file with no problems.  Trying this 
with
VueScan results in a fault as I have reported to you as in the A4 
fault.
That is, the scanner goes into fault mode and, on some occasions, 
VueScan
stops responding.

Trying a 2-pass scan of a 4 by 5 inch area in VueScan resulted in the 
first
pass working (as deduced from VueScan) but then a fault appeared in the
second scan and the scanner locked up.

To answer Rob's question regarding a generic fault in scanning large 
areas
with the 1200U, all I can say is that Epson Twain software reports that 
it
can't continue as 'there is insufficient disc space or RAM available' 
and
then resets everying (rather than locking up).  VueScan doesn't report 
this
but, in my experience may put the scanner into a fault condition.  For
example, I scanned a 4 by 5 inch area using VueScan and a 2 pass scan. 
 The
first was OK but a fault developed in the scanner on the second pass.

I just don't understand what is going on here.

Regards

Bob Armstrong


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: Re: (O) SS4K Shadow noise

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:23:40 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net ([207.217.121.233])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA28100
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:54:09 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from [209.245.99.154] 
(dialup-209.245.99.154.Manchester1.Level3.net [209.245.99.154])
by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP 
id OAA26510
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:54:00 
-0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:52:00 -0700
From: WALTER  MESS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-UIDL: c8d2b5a5b9ad35f618263ebc9aafb5be
Subject: Re: (O) SS4K Shadow noise

I have to agree with David.  I shoot a lot of contrasty florals against
black and darkly colored velvet.  The shadows and dark blacks are the 
least
of my problems.  The solid black backgrounds are always perfect.  In 
PS,
when I run the eyedroper across them the "info" palette shows very 
subtle
distinctions in color values that are indistinguishable on my 
calibrated
LaCie.  The scanner is picking up variations that are undetectable 
visually.
Sharpness, on the other hand, is still a challenge.

Walt
on 10/18/00 2:31 PM, Hemingway, David J at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> The SS4000 does very well in the shadows as reported by several 
reviews and
> particapants of this list who use or review the SS4000.
> The following is from a review by Bruce Fraser:
> The dynamic range of 3.4 seems conservative-starting with 
high-contrast
> slides, we obtained results with shadow detail comparable to that in 
scans
> from scanners with a quoted dynamic range of 3.6-and at 4,000 dpi, 
the
> scanner offers the highest resolution in its class.
> I do not know if the problem is releated to the film being out of the 
range
> of the profile, a problem with the particular piece of hardware or 
operator
> error but poor shadow performance is not indicative of the product.
> I may suggest you try a raw scan into Photoshop or PolaColor Insight.
> Thanks
> David
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: evan_anderson Last Name [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 1:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: (O) SS4K Shadow noise
> 
> 
> It's disappointing to hear that you get this much shadow noise using 
the
> SS4000...I'm looking to move up from the HP Photosmart S20 for this 
very
> reason.  I wonder if the multiple scanning feature of Silverfast 
software
> (now bundled with the SS4000) can get rid of most
> of this noise?
> 
> --Evan Anderson
> 
>> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:32:12 -0400
>> From: glenn mclaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: Filmscannerslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: (O) SS4K Shadow noise
>> 
>> I have noticed on some of my scans (maybe all but more noticeable on
> some
>> than others) in the dense shadow areas i get a , well like a," burnt 
ocra"
>> kinda color contamination (or reddish brown) happening where it 
should be
>> neutral. I've been able in some cases to selectively correct it with 
color
>> range and alot of tweaking in PS, but am wondering if it's just 
pushing the
>> limits of the scanner's  3 . whatever D-Max to resolve in that 
density.
>> There's detail on the chromes.
>> Could it be a function of the cathode tube illumination since it's 
kinda
>> like a greeny, cyany kinda color ??
>> and the redishness is needless to say just the opposite ,so is there 
a
> cross
>> going on or an overcompensation of some kind ??
>> I'm using Silverfast with IT-8 on a Mac and all the other density 
ranges
>> seem to be pretty clean. I'm thoroughly happy with my output other 
than
> this
>> so far.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Glenn.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
>> To resign, send a msg to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE
> FILMSCANNERS in the title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> Before you buy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
> To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE 
FILMSCANNERS
> in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILM

Fw: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:22:04 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from portal.dx.net (portal.dx.net [199.190.65.2])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA11039
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:39:48 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from FWPHOTO (ss227.lrbcg.com [206.162.40.227])
by portal.dx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA16984
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:54:33 
-0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <023501c03a04$30824da0$f028a2ce@FWPHOTO>
From: "Frank Wiewandt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:36:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
X-UIDL: e7c90cc1fbbbc9ac3e3fc36b35c19df7
Subject: Re: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

Richard,

Thanks for your reply.

> VueScan will give you full bit depth from your hardware plus very 
good
> correction for each film type -- especially important with color
> negatives. Photoshop corrections will be easier and faster and you 
can
> do them to 16 bit RGB data before you reduce to 8 bit.

I was wondering about this. I knew that the 1200S scanned in 
16(12?)bit,
but outputted in 8bit through the Twain plug-in. Getting 16bit info 
into
PS alone is more than worth the price. Especially if you've got PS6.

Anything else? (Am I being greedy? :-)

Regards,

Frank Wiewandt


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: RE: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:21:21 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from h6m3t9 (efikim.compulink.co.uk [194.153.7.117])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id UAA28076
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:04:34 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: "Mike Finley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:15:02 +0100
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Importance: Normal
X-UIDL: 3fdfb18ed18bc44758496cf083bd2297
Subject: RE: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.

However, full bit depth is 8 bits for the Epson Perfection 1200 ...
Vuescan makes getting decent colour out of colour negative easier, but
probably doesn't offer so much with transparencies.

mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Richard Wolfson
Sent: 19 October 2000 19:11
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: VueScan & Epson 1200S success & question.


VueScan will give you full bit depth from your hardware plus very good
correction for each film type -- especially important with color
negatives. Photoshop corrections will be easier and faster and you can
do them to 16 bit RGB data before you reduce to 8 bit.

TWAIN scans give you 8 bit data needing lots of correction in 
Photoshop.

Richard Wolfson
rwolfson at LyricDesign.com


> From: Frank Wiewandt
>
> I finally got VueScan to work with my Epson 1200S.
>
> Now I'm wondering what are the advantages of VueScan over
> importing the Twain scans into PhotoShop as I have done to
> this point. I'm really looking for the best "raw" scans to
> open in PS & do the adjusting there.



The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE 
FILMSCANNERS
in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the
Digest.


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

ADMIN : LIST PROBLEMS

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Sorry about the 20hr absence of the list. The server decided to throw its 
best wobbly to date by developing an allergy to its SCSI controller. 
Hopefully its last tantrum as it is moving to a proper home on Monday or 
Tuesday next week.

The listserver s/w was damaged during a reinstall but I didn't notice 
until it was run. No mail has been lost (I think) but I am forwarding 
several to the list which slipped past the initial problem.

Regards 

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner 
info & comparisons

The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: Re: CMYK vs RGB for publication

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:25:38 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from hermes.csd.unb.ca (hermes.csd.unb.ca [131.202.3.20])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA07003
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 03:45:17 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from pop.unb.ca ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [131.202.3.36])
by hermes.csd.unb.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA18845
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:45:19 
-0300 (ADT)
Received: from [131.202.97.108] ([131.202.97.108])
by pop.unb.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA20590
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:45:19 
-0300 (ADT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-Id: 
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:45:17 -0300
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Roger Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-UIDL: ebbc9c0cf4c00a54a935285487b7ba52
Subject: Re: CMYK vs RGB for publication

I seem to have stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest here - all 
to the good, I'm sure. Thanks to everyone for their input, and it may 
not stop here.

At 11:37 AM +0100 10/19/00, jeremy spence wrote:
>Its fairly standard practice to provide a proof of some sort for the
>printers. Doing CMYK conversions without having a profile for the 
process is
>just as likely to lead to difficulty as sending RGB files. I think in 
this
>case what you've got is a Time/Motion/Workflow decision by the 
printers,
>that if they can shave a few moments off jobs here and there then 
they'll be
>saving more money than they lose through not providing a full service.


At 11:37 AM +0100 10/19/00, Tony Sleep wrote:
>What they are saying is exactly that : they don't have the software or
>>  system to do it properly, therefore you must do it for them. What 
are you
>>  going to do? Convert in Photoshop? They could of course do the 
same, and
>>  using correct settings for their process which you can only guess 
at.
>  >

At 1:37 PM +1000 10/19/00, Rob Geraghty wrote:
>  Am I on the
>right track in thinking that what is required is a profile for the 
CMYK
>device before adjusting the colours in CMYK is advisable?


What I was trying to get at is what Jeremy, Tony, and Rob say 
in the above quotes. Having me, for example, send CMYK files to the 
printer with no idea of the settings required would surely result in 
a "worse print job" as Tony describes it. Do the printers adjust my 
CMYK file which I presume is already "crippled" from my hack 
conversion job from RGB? Providing a proof does seem to be a useful 
step, but I suppose it still takes some trial and error to get a 
match.
I have seen at least three other publications which require 
CMYK files from authors. If it's so bad, how do these places stay in 
business? From what Tony says, it seems to be an all-too-common 
occurence. Maybe I've answered my own question.

Regards,
Roger Smith


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.

Fw: RE: (O) SS4K Shadow noise

2000-10-20 Thread Tony Sleep 

Owing to a little local difficulty, this msg has been delayed and 
forwarded. TS

 Forwarded Message 
Received: from 127.0.0.1 by tsphoto (VPOP3) with POP3; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 
15:25:31 +0100
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection0: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection1: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection2: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection3: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection4: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection5: X
X-NAV-TimeoutProtection6: X
Received: from mail4.txucom.net (mail4.txucom.net [207.70.175.17])
by nickel.cix.co.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) with SMTP id DAA29719
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 03:05:29 
+0100 (BST)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 18678 invoked from network); 20 Oct 2000 02:05:00 
-
Received: from conr-ddas4-a44.txucom.net (HELO hd22b) ([209.34.0.182]) 
(envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
  by mail4.txucom.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
  for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 20 Oct 2000 02:05:00 -
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "G. H. Yeldezian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 21:04:58 -0500
Message-ID: <01c03a3b$7a3be140$05b2c990@hd22b>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
X-UIDL: 8bb634784d87bc67cb39cff84be0258b
Subject: RE: (O) SS4K Shadow noise

just a couple of additional comments.

i just purchased an ss4k a month ago.  it came with insight 3.5 and
silverfast.  i always
check web sights to be sure i have the latest software and found the 
latest
versions of the firmeware
and insight.  i must be naive to presume that anyone playing with this 
this
level of "stuff" has
enough sense to look at the manufacturer's web sight to be sure they 
have
the current software.  this is a
'first thing' that i always do.  [this is a standard thing any 
operating
system guy does -- purchase win2000
in ANY store and for sure you don't have the latest fixes/upgrades or
version.]

glenn yeldezian

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 5:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: (O) SS4K Shadow noise


> And for a totally opposite conclusion read this review:
>
> http://www.pcphotomag.com/content/pastissues/2000/july/scanner.html

Polaroid appear to still be shipping Insight 3.5 on CD, to judge from
email I get, and this is what they seem to have tested with here ('non
TWAIN'). It has plenty of problems not present in the current 4.5, and
most reviewers reached the erroneous conclusion that the spurious green
present in dark tones was noise. It isn't, and it has gone in later
versions. Very silly of P to still be sending 3.5 out with new 
scanners,
especially for review!

The LS2000 is capable of slightly lower noise and slightly stronger 
dark
tone separation, but only through use of 16x multiscanning.

I was amused by their enthusiasm for the Nikon IS-200 bulk hopper, nice
idea but famously troublesome.

Regards

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
info & comparisons

The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE 
FILMSCANNERS
in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the
Digest.


The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign,  with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the 
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.