Re:HP 6200c + Vuescan ... was: filmscanners: 7.0.6 Great !
I think Rob is right , I am also using W98SE and the ASPI drivers for the HP stuff were the worst drivers I ever saw. I have just receved the new ones from HP ... If you want I can copy the CD and send it to you or upload to an FTP site. Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site - Original Message - From: "Rob Geraghty" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 7:53 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: 7.0.6 Great ! John wrote: But it doesn't with mine for some reason. It scans a very small part of the top of the page and then stops. The scanner (SCSI connection) works fine with the included HP software. Ed - any suggestions as to the problem? I'm running NT4 sp6 (it did this with all previous versions of VS using NT4 sp3 also). Perhaps this is an ASPI issue? Have you tried installing the ASPI drivers for your SCSI card? You'll need to email Ed directly for feedback as he is no longer subscribed to this list. Vuescan works fine with my HP Scanjet IIIc in Win98SE. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Color negative Film test strips
Art, you've been confused I am afraid Roman At 18:59 27/03/2001 -0800, you wrote: Michael Wilkinson wrote: - Original Message - From: "Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED] (although test strips are available for C-41, I don't : believe any of the manufacturers offer to read them) Interesting. Even the one hour lab I ran had it's own densitometer, and all lab personnel were trained in reading the test strips. I should mention that the E-6 test strips used for the premium services (such as Q lab, etc) are not standard test strips. They measure things like pH, nitrate levels, etc, in the chemistry. Art Art, alll the chemistry manufacturers have reading services. regards Michael Wilkinson. 106 Holyhead Road,Ketley, Telford.Shropshire TF 15 DJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.infocus-photography.co.uk For Trannies and Negs from Digital Files01952 618986 "Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia".
RE: filmscanners: Canon FS2710 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II
[Tim A wrote] I Have used the Canoscan with other scanners, but not the Minolta. I have found using Vuescan with the Canoscan does wonders. Even basic scans come out with less noise. Do a multi passes or the long exposure pass gives me great scans - adding shadow detail and getting rid of shadow noise. I have to agree - showed a mate the difference between Vuescan and CanoScan last night on one of his 'difficult' negs and he wept with joy (ummm). He spent about 2 hours with Photoshop trying to get a result to no effect. A bit more difficult to use, but a whole lot more effective. bert
Re: filmscanners: Windows XP, the good, the bad, the ugh!
At 19:56 27-03-01 -0800, you wrote: Windows XP is getting the best overall reviews I've seen since Win 95, which might be a bad omen ;-) Seems it has cleaned itself up quite a bit, while basically stealing a lot of look and feel from the Mac OS. I believe it is based upon WIN 2000. I also understand one big problem is that it requires registration on line, and that it "records" which computer it has been placed on. There is a problem if you change motherboards or other major components because the registration process is designed to prevent the OS from being installed on numerous computers. You then have to go to Microsoft, hat in hand, and ask for permission to reinstall on a "revamped" system. A bit like buying a video or a book and not being able to take it to your new house :-)) Stuart
Re: filmscanners: Color Calibration
Maris, I respect your viewpoint and I was in the same position when we had a closed loop system which meant that we shot,scanned and output back to film in house. However when you are supplying digital files to someone else and they don't want or can not check what you give them then they have to be certain that you are giving them a recognised standard ! The only way you can achieve that is to carefully profile your monitor. How you do this is up to you. It is becoming increasingly evident that those people who make their living from supplying digital image files are going to have to ensure that they do so to a recognised standard. We are aware that there are in reality very few scenes which have naturally occurring white grey and black in their pure form so how can you ensure an images accurate colour rendition by numbers in a software like Photoshop if you don't have a reference ? If however you have a monitor which is calibrated correctly and your viewing conditions are ideal and constant you are at least in with a chance of ensuring a colour balance which,just like a print in the darkroom,looks right. If you think I am wrong I would respectfully suggest you have a look at the various Pro forums and magazines which are regularly discussing this very topic and are formulating what is hoped to be a world wide industry standard. Even Adobe advise calibrating a monitor with and external calibration system. I am aware that there are monitors made by companies such as Barco which have the hardware built in and I believe they start at around 5000. - Original Message - From: "Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:43 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Color Calibration : No, you're not going to *have* to buy one. You can fly without shifting : gears. What I see is what I get and all I did to get was calibrate the : monitor and watch the numbers and pick the right printer profile from : several stock.
Re: filmscanners: Windows XP, the good, the bad, the ugh!
- Original Message - At 19:56 27-03-01 -0800, you wrote: Windows XP is getting the best overall reviews I've seen since Win 95, which might be a bad omen ;-) Seems it has cleaned itself up quite a bit, while basically stealing a lot of look and feel from the Mac OS. I believe it is based upon WIN 2000. I also understand one big problem is that it requires registration on line, and that it "records" which computer it has been placed on. There is a problem if you change motherboards or other major components because the registration process is designed to prevent the OS from being installed on numerous computers. You then have to go to Microsoft, hat in hand, and ask for permission to reinstall on a "revamped" system. I suspect you will have to go to Microsoft web site and unregister it from your PC first. MS has this same type of scheme with Windows 2000 Terminal Server desktop licenses. I heard they were doing away with it because it is a real pain in the neck. Hopefully it won't materialize with XP.
filmscanners: Re: OT on Windows XP
The REAL problem it is NOT to HAVE TO PAY a LOT OF MONEY ! to Microsoft, but to have WINDOWS NT (whatever version you should prefer to call it ) as the kernel of the so called ''NEW'' operating system. I wonder what will happen with the drivers of legacy boards and systems ;-) ... having seen so many people going to bananas about it . Also ... nobody is speaking about Windows NT on 64 bit systems not even as a perspective ... interesting enough ... Sincerely. Ezio - Original Message - From: "Stuart" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:56 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Windows XP, the good, the bad, the ugh! At 19:56 27-03-01 -0800, you wrote: Windows XP is getting the best overall reviews I've seen since Win 95, which might be a bad omen ;-) Seems it has cleaned itself up quite a bit, while basically stealing a lot of look and feel from the Mac OS. I believe it is based upon WIN 2000. I also understand one big problem is that it requires registration on line, and that it "records" which computer it has been placed on. There is a problem if you change motherboards or other major components because the registration process is designed to prevent the OS from being installed on numerous computers. You then have to go to Microsoft, hat in hand, and ask for permission to reinstall on a "revamped" system. A bit like buying a video or a book and not being able to take it to your new house :-)) Stuart
Re: filmscanners: Digital Film Output
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:00:24 +0100 Michael Wilkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: If you have a particular regular client who does not trust you digital files why not make just one tranny for them and provide that along with all the others on the CD. I have 3 with whom this is an ongoing problem, and two are far too mean - they just say 'give us machine prints'. The third says 'give us the negs and we'll get hand prints done'. Neither way produces what I think the pic should look like:( The last might be amenable to a written-to-film file, I'll try it. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
filmscanners: Silverfast enquiry
Has anybody on here used Silverfast Ai with IT8 on a Nikin film scanner, and if so what are their conclusions. Richard Corbett
Re: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. I believe Vuescan probably still only really works to sRGB internally, so when you select a wider output space such as AdobeRGB, sRGB gamut occupies a subset of that space. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Re: Scanning dpi and epson papers
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:25:55 +0900 Mark T. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I've visited www.wilhelm-research.com many times recently (and again just then) and there is still no 'update'.. they just keep changing the date! It has appeared moribund for a good while. At a guess, a broken business model. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Color Calibration
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:18:41 +0100 Michael Wilkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Do any of you use a colour temperature meter when shooting interiors ? Ah, no. For two reasons. First that simple red/blue meters like the Gossen Sixticolor are fairly useless IME - OK it tells you the Mired shift, but seems unduly influenced by scene colour. I had so many anomalous results with them (I have 2, and of course both read slightly different anyhow, like exposure meters:) that I found guessing was more accurate. 3-channel RGB devices like the Minolta are too expensive for me to have ever owned one, but hopefully work better. The second reason is what do you do about correction? With 35mm you are limited to 81, 82 series etc, unless you are going to faff around with CC gels in a holder. This just isn't practical for most of the shooting I do, there is neither the time nor the static situation to permit it - gels have got reduced to trash in seconds when I have used them. Incidentally, glass filters seem to be extremely variable between makes, no two manufacturers make an 81a which is anything like anyone else's. Warm-balanced film like E100SW seems to work better than 81 series do, unless it's very blue light. It's a major reason why I like colour neg:) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Repro house skirmishing (long)
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 10:46:41 -0600 Laurie Solomon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: nor do I think the print will be handled that roughly in terms of being flexed into a tight enough arch to cause the "fracturing" or rectilineation that you are speaking about. They will be rolling it up to go into a drum scanner. OTOH if bits flake off, that would be a plus - sabotage and revenge combined:). Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:15:35 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: but while we all recognize with kudos the advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its weakness and lack of scanner characterization. Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. He hasn't hived the matrix off into a profile as he doesn't want competitors nicking it, at least that is what he has said. I don't find any problem with this in practice - what emerges from Vuescan is tagged as being in a selected colour space, and it is, as the image data has been run through the transform and then into the tagged output space. It is just that how it got to be there cannot be reverse-engineered without delving into his code. The VS workflow goes - raw scan (scan+n.tif, if you opt to write it to disk) - apply hardcoded scanner transform - apply selected output profile = output file Crop_n.tif, tagged with output profile AFAICS you only *need* the scanner profile if you want to work with the first, raw scan. And you'd only want to do that if you had some means of characterising your own, personal scanner and making your own superior profile for it. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Canon FS2710 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II
Art Ii wouldn't worry about the refurb. units. Customers return things for a variety of reasons, sometimes with nothing at all wrong with them. The returned units can no longer be sold as new and must be checked out and "refurbished" to be sold again. My Minolta Scan Dual I came from uBid and was a refurb. Other than the stickers on the box and paperwork inside, I couldn't tell it from mew. It works as new also. I've purchased a lot of this type of merchandise over the years with excellent luck. I always figured it this way - at least the refurb. unit was looked at and tested by a technician before it was shipped out. Do you know the day of the year that always has the largest number of large screen TV returns? The day after the Superbowl... :-) -- Jim Arthur Entlich wrote: I'd also be interested in replies to this. I noticed two things of interest in regard to the Minolta Dimage Dual Scan II. One, here in Canada, its backordered for up to two months due to demand. 2) I saw a bunch of refurbed units for same recently on "ubid", which worried me, being that this model has only come out perhaps 6 months ago, if that. Art
Re: filmscanners: HP pigmented inks
Art: Thanks!! Gordon Arthur Entlich wrote: OK, so you are going to make me work, eh? the url for Jon Cone's site: http://www.inkjetmall.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Filmscanners" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 10:22 PM Has anyone figured out how to use this color space option?? VS's help file implies the resulting color space will be that of the "device", BUT the profile is not embedded. How would you convert to a Photoshop editing work space if the 'from' device space is not known or embedded?? I was hoping this option would have allowed me to select an actual ICM which came with the scanner, or had been empirically created. It would seem to be the best color space for archiving the original scan. Actually, the Vuescan 'raw' scan is always the best choice for archiving ... but not necessarily for everyone. The use of this option is a mystery. I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. In my case Minolta Dual ll. Maybe it is not better than what VS can, but at least you can try it and for some it is better. Don't make it a mystery :) Regards, Mark
filmscanners: Re: Canon FS2710 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II
At 11:34 AM +0100 3/28/01, Robert Logan wrote: I have found using Vuescan with the Canoscan does wonders. Even basic scans come out with less noise. Do a multi passes or the long exposure pass gives me great scans - adding shadow detail and getting rid of shadow noise. I have to agree - showed a mate the difference between Vuescan and CanoScan last night on one of his 'difficult' negs and he wept with joy (ummm). He spent about 2 hours with Photoshop trying to get a result to no effect. A bit more difficult to use, but a whole lot more effective. I also agree - I've been using VueScan with my Canon FS2710 for almost a year, and for the most part it is great. My original question was how does the Canon compare to the Minolta. Presumably if the Minolta is basically better than the Canon, it will be better under VueScan as well. I made the comment about noise on the Canon as a point of comparison. Thanks for the replies, Roger Smith
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 5:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:15:35 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: but while we all recognize with kudos the advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its weakness and lack of scanner characterization. Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. ... I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. I need to play with this option ... I simply opened VS yesterday to inspect the help file and look and feel of the v.7 GUI. If I catch the gist of current users of this option, I may well end up in the color space I want by "assigning" the 3-D LUT profile upon opening ... altho it would have been better to go straight to it via a "color space = 'none'" option so I could take advantage of IR cleaning. I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... still, I rather know for sure because I'm otherwise inadequately evaluating how well it works in monitor space (as it is presented in Photoshop). I'll see if he hasn't responded to a similar query at the comp.periphs.scanners newsgroup. (... nope ...) shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
Tony writes ... On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. I believe Vuescan probably still only really works to sRGB internally, so when you select a wider output space such as AdobeRGB, sRGB gamut occupies a subset of that space. It is important to realize if the observation is "more saturated as viewed with Vuescan" OR "as viewed with Photoshop". If the observation is with respect to Vuescan, sRGB or AdobeRGB data is viewed in monitor space, in which case AdobeRGB will naturally appear less saturated, and sRGB be appear more correct because it is a psuedo-monitor space. If you scan into a variety of color spaces, and view them all with PS6, they should all appear the same (PS6 being the necessary software, you cannot do all co-existingly with PS5). shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Canon FS2710 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II
Jim wrote-- Customers return things for a variety of reasons, sometimes with nothing at all wrong with them. Do you know the day of the year that always has the largest number of large screen TV returns? The day after the Superbowl... :-) This probably speaks "volumes" about customer prefs, and why "refurbs" are not always such a bad deal, so long as there's at least a minimal guarantee attached. Still, they also come with an implied "Caveat Emptor" attached, just like a used car does. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
I think MAC users are going to become more like 4x5 users - Ilford has discontinued Delta 400 in sheet film "due to lack of demand for the product". A dying breed :) Tim a -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Raymond Carles Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:08:23 -0600, Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote: For those interested, per CNET: "Adobe recently released Photoshop Elements, a new image editor that combines power with simplicity into a single, low-cost graphics package. Try it out here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-108-75428.html Maris One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles
RE: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long)
Jim please tell me you're kidding. ME was solid out of the box? I got a new computer last month with ME, and the thing never stopped crashing. I eventually just upgraded to Windows 2000, and things have been fine ever since. Now, I was reading a bulletin board at zdnet last night where people did nothing to bash MS left and right, and sing the praises of Unix. I know one thing- it's not perfect, but Windows brought computing into the everyday world, so normal people could use it, and not just programmers who worked hard to learn Unix or whatever else. Personally, having worked with a guy who LOVED Unix, I know that if it was a choice for me between Unix and nothing, nothing would be it. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 11:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long) I agree that there were issues with 95, 98, and 98SE but ME was rock solid right out of the box (purchased last September). There were issues with device drivers, and some products still do not have ME drivers, but the OS itself is rock stable - never a blue screen, ever. I believe, with the new driver architecture, Windows 2000, XP, and ME will be even better. I'm not a fan of Microsoft but I think their operating systems are starting to mature and I think that will help those of us who use graphics. Jim JimD wrote: I'm going to give it about 2 years to disgorge its bugs and then it may be fit for use. Microsoft's releases are akin to good wine, generally they benefit by being aged. -JimD It has a few innovations that I believe will make life a great deal better for a good many of us. Peer to peer communications, improved device interface, and better memory management, to name a few. Just hope it's not all Internet user friendly with frills for sending the kid's photos to grandma. I think getting away from the old VXD drivers and using the WDM (Windows Drive Managed) architecture is a definite plus Microsoft's Windows XP home page is at: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/default.asp Jim Dave
RE: filmscanners: Repro house skirmishing (long)
I guess it would depend on the drum scanner as to how tight an arch it would be rolled into, which may depend on the size of the drum on the drum scanner. However, from what I had heard about the problem, the fracturing was usually never that visible to the naked eye unless you pacifistically looked for it and when the print was already arched and never bad enough that bits of the print flaked off due to the fracturing. Tony look at it this way, if the repro house does tightly arch the print causing it to flack apart, you could sue them for damaging the print. :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 7:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Repro house skirmishing (long) On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 10:46:41 -0600 Laurie Solomon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: nor do I think the print will be handled that roughly in terms of being flexed into a tight enough arch to cause the "fracturing" or rectilineation that you are speaking about. They will be rolling it up to go into a drum scanner. OTOH if bits flake off, that would be a plus - sabotage and revenge combined:). Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Digital Film Output
Tony writes: I have 3 [clients] with whom this is an ongoing problem, and two are far too mean - they just say 'give us machine prints'. The third says 'give us the negs and we'll get hand prints done'. Neither way produces what I think the pic should look like:( Speaking from what used-to-be a "Client's" position, Tony, I'd say that you're doing almost everything right. Give the client hard copy and say, "This is what it's going to look like." Then give the repro-house the same hard-copy and say, "This is what it's going to look like. Any Questions?" It will probably take a bit of standing shoulder-to-shoulder in the pressroom--with you, the pressman, the repro rep or sales guy, and jr.editor or AD, all looking at the same things under a Macbeth light, to resolve it (been there, done that). But once you have done it once, you'll hopefully have built up everyone's confidence in the fact that you know what you're doing. That in itself is worth a lot. Unfortunately, you can't bill for that time you spend to prove your point. But if you have a happy client, you'll get more work in all cases except from the ones you wouldn't want to work for, anyway (consider it "advertising expense" and bill it against your taxes if you can). It's part of the "Cost of Doing Business," as will be the cost of a pint for everyone involved, after the job comes out the way you insisted that it would. :-) That's my two pence, and it's worked for me. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
filmscanners: Vuescan 7.0.7
VueScan v7.0.7 is available for download at: http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html Dale P.S. The following are a list of changes: What's new in version 7.0.7 * Added preliminary support for SprintScan 120 * Fixed problem with FireWire scanners on Windows * Fixed problem with lamp warmup on some UMAX scanners * Fixed problem exiting when Scan Dual II door is open * Quick change to Preview or Scan tab when button pressed
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
shAF wrote: I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... "Nearly imperceivable effects" are a large part of what makes a picture "excellent" instead of "good." A little more subtle than the difference between "lightning" and "a lightning bug," but you all get the picture. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:08:23 -0600, Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote: For those interested, per CNET: "Adobe recently released Photoshop Elements, a new image editor that combines power with simplicity into a single, low-cost graphics package. Try it out here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-108-75428.html Maris One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles
filmscanners: AcerScanwit
There are a bunch of Acer Scanwit 2740S scanners on Ebay. Is this a competent machine? Anyone using one on a Mac? Rich
Re: filmscanners: Color Calibration
I use a Minolta colour temp meter with gels but only when Im using a tripod and H/blad or Monorail Its a reasonable way foreword and far more noticeable when using Tranny. Fuji 400 is my choice for mixed lighting,scans well and is very tweakable in the darkroom. If you are working quickly its almost impossible to use gels unless you've used the location before. The drawback to any on camera colour correction though is that in mixed lighting you can only correct for one source. Ive shot jobs in tungsten light using tungsten film and half a dozen Metz 60 flashguns with orange and red filters on as fill ins and highlighters,works a treat ! Michael Wilkinson. 106 Holyhead Road,Ketley, Telford.Shropshire TF 15 DJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.infocus-photography.co.uk For Trannies and Negs from Digital Files01952 618986 - Original Message - From: "Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Ah, no. For two reasons. First that simple red/blue meters like the Gossen : Sixticolor are fairly useless IME - OK it tells you the Mired shift, but seems : unduly influenced by scene colour. I had so many anomalous results with them (I : have 2, and of course both read slightly different anyhow, like exposure : meters:) that I found guessing was more accurate. 3-channel RGB devices like : the Minolta are too expensive for me to have ever owned one, but hopefully work : better. : : The second reason is what do you do about correction? With 35mm you are limited : to 81, 82 series etc, unless you are going to faff around with CC gels in a : holder. This just isn't practical for most of the shooting I do, there is : neither the time nor the static situation to permit it - gels have got reduced : to trash in seconds when I have used them.
Re: filmscanners: Canon FS2710 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II
I've always looked on refurbs as the best of both worlds... one hand is the lower price, the other is that the unit has already failed in the field (or been returned for whatever reason) and the factory has had to not only fix it but make sure it passes even more rigorous tests than the new units coming off the line, so it's less prone to fail... the one time I had a problem with a factory refurb was a Mitsubishi monitor, the red gun failed, and they sent me a brand new latest and greatest model since they no longer made the one I had bought... not a bad deal... Mike M. Lynn Allen wrote: Jim wrote-- Customers return things for a variety of reasons, sometimes with nothing at all wrong with them. Do you know the day of the year that always has the largest number of large screen TV returns? The day after the Superbowl... :-) This probably speaks "volumes" about customer prefs, and why "refurbs" are not always such a bad deal, so long as there's at least a minimal guarantee attached. Still, they also come with an implied "Caveat Emptor" attached, just like a used car does. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Windows XP, the good, the bad, the ugh!
+-- Arthur Entlich wrote 01-03-27: Windows XP is getting the best overall reviews I've seen since Win 95, which might be a bad omen ;-) Seems it has cleaned itself up quite a bit, while basically stealing a lot of look and feel from the Mac OS. I believe it is based upon WIN 2000. +- And finally, Bill is also following Steve in favouring FireWire instead of USB2. You might be interested in reading yesterdays article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/2/17919.html Good for scanner people... __heb Harald E Brandt[EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP/MIME awarehttp://heb.surf.to
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
Adobe Elements will be released as both platform on the CD. It's release spells the death of Photoshop LE and the intention is for it to be bundled with scanners/cameras as LE currently is. Larry One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... ::: Larry Berman Web Sites for Artists: http://BermanGraphics.com Digital Infrared at: http://IRDreams.com Compare Image Compression from the top Graphics Programs: http://ImageCompress.com Explore the Art Show Jury process from a web site: http://ArtShowJury.com :::
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
I wasn't aware that Mac users needed a simple, introductory graphics package. There are a ton of imaging software programs for the Mac, and many of them are Mac only. Take Graphic Converter, as but one example of Mac only imaging software. http://www.lemkesoft.com Programs to analyze gamuts, management of ICC profiles, and all sorts of color management tools are - for the most part - initially only on Mac platforms. And this is largely because Microsoft has - for the most part - neglected color management, and its implications. Their focus has been elsewhere. Adobe gets around this by programming their own color management into PS - - to boost the nascent Windows offering. I'm sure for additional programming cost. Adobe is firmly dedicated to the Mac platform; all Adobe products will become "carbonized" by late summer, meaning available to OS X, as well as OS 9.1. In addition, the new Photoshop V7. will contain features which will not be available on Windows until at least 6 months later. All of this has been revealed to the public. Incidentally, the upcoming release of Microsoft Office for (Mac) OS X will also have features not available on Windows immediately. I suspect in this case it is because of MS's upcoming release of "Windows X" which will permit "competitive" features. Not that there aren't enough features in Office already. Windows people are only beginning to become involved - as a mainstream - in image manipulation. Need something simple to start with, perhaps something simpler than Photoshop LE. But this is good, because the public in general will acquire imaging knowledge that Mac people have had for some time. Now, if we could only get repro houses in the UK educated on CM - - Suspect that Adobe's marketing research had found this, and their reason for dedicating the below to Windows only. In the entire imaging, multi-media, graphics industry, I don't feel neglected using a Mac. If you are doing CAD work in engineering, then it is a different story. But not in the above industries. On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:08:23 -0600, Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote: For those interested, per CNET: "Adobe recently released Photoshop Elements, a new image editor that combines power with simplicity into a single, low-cost graphics package. Try it out here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-108-75428.html Maris One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles
filmscanners: Vuescan 7.0.7 released
Hamrick Software - http://www.hamrick.com/ VueScan 7.0.7 Release Notes March 28, 2001 Quick Start for VueScan: To scan an image: 1) Double-click c:\vuescan\vuescan.exe on Windows or run vuescan on Linux or Mac OS 2) Insert film into scanner 3) Press "Preview" button 4) Adjust crop box 5) Press "Scan" button To scan multiple images in a batch, set the "Crop|Frame number" option to "1-6" and then press the "Scan" button. Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Not that many reviews but those that are out there say it works well. But apparently VueScan no longer supports it, though it supports the 2720S. Maris - Original Message - From: "Richard Starr" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:04 PM Subject: filmscanners: AcerScanwit | There are a bunch of Acer Scanwit 2740S scanners on Ebay. Is this a competent | machine? Anyone using one on a Mac? | | Rich |
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
Larry wrote: Adobe Elements will be released as both platform on the CD. It's release spells the death of Photoshop LE and the intention is for it to be bundled with scanners/cameras as LE currently is. Death may be too easy an "out" for LE, but the fact is that the $499US upgrade is a little steep for amateurs. I really hope Adobe thinks this out a bit--it's an excellent program and a "must" for professionals, but their "self esteem" lacks modesty, which ain't good. Best regards--LRA PS--the EULA mentioned in earlier posts *is not* available in the USA, except for special "bundles." --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Mark wrote: I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
Richard wrote: There are a ton of imaging software programs for the Mac, and many of them are Mac onlyPrograms to analyze gamuts, management of ICC profiles, and all sorts of color management tools are - for the most part - initially only on Mac platforms. Apple and Mac have led the way in print-production software. Nobody needs to question that, because it's quite evident. That's not to say it's the best, but that they have the most momentum, and Adobe with them. And good for them. all Adobe products will become "carbonized" by late summer, meaning available to OS X, as well as OS 9.1. In addition, the new Photoshop V7. will contain features which will not be available on Windows until at least 6 months later. I have very bad memories of Adobe "ports" to PC--nearly unusable, as I recall. I really hope we're not going back into that mode again!!! Software mfgrs need to remember that we're a "working community" out here (not me, I retired)--As such, We'll appreciate those who support us, and "remember" those who didn't. And I remember Adobe and Microsoft, *very well*. Hoping your predictions don't come true--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
RE: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Richard wrote: There are a bunch of Acer Scanwit 2740S scanners on Ebay. Is this a competent machine? Anyone using one on a Mac? Not on a Mac, but it's not platform-dependent (it's SCSI--G-4 notwithstanding). And yes, it's competent; the 2740 is an upgrade from the 2700S. But keep shopping--there are better scanners, if you can afford them. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
Nuh, unh, Tim. Macs are good machines! Pricey, but good. Let's not start another G**ded flame war! Best regards--LRA --Original Message-- From: "Tim Atherton" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 28, 2001 5:00:11 PM GMT Subject: RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements I think MAC users are going to become more like 4x5 users - Ilford has discontinued Delta 400 in sheet film "due to lack of demand for the product". A dying breed :) Tim a -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Raymond Carles Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:08:23 -0600, Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote: For those interested, per CNET: "Adobe recently released Photoshop Elements, a new image editor that combines power with simplicity into a single, low-cost graphics package. Try it out here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-108-75428.html Maris One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. ... I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. The following may be found in the vuescan help file - Introduction: VueScan uses color correction tables which have been derived from a Kodak Q60 calibration slide and which produce colors accurate to better than 1%. The default color primaries and white point are the same as used by the Kodak PhotoCD system - Rec. 709 primaries with a D65 white point. And from a post from Ed last January: Most scanners return raw data straight from the CCD. Some scanners do color conversion internally. The Epson scanners all (optionally) convert colors to sRGB before returning it to the host computer (this is the mode that VueScan uses). Other scanners (i.e. HP) let you download a 3x3 matrix to do the color transform in the scanner, but I never use this in VueScan. To interact with Ed in a public forum -- from the Vuescan web page: If you'd like to exchange tips with other people using a wide range of different scanners, try the comp.periphs.scanners newsgroup. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
filmscanners: memory for film scanning
The subject has been raised several times recently of how to get faster access to files and better performance when scanning huge files. This is for Windoze folks, so Mac users can delete this message now. ;) Have a look at the Microsoft Knowledge Base article Q123747 titled "Moving the Windows NT Default Paging and Spool File". It explains how to move the virtual memory files and printer spool files in NT4 and Win2K to a different drive. What this allows you to do is arrange your computer so that different physical drives are performing different functions. If data is being read from and written to different drives rather than the same drive, access should be faster. For instance, you could set up your computer with three ATA drives - one for the OS and applications, and the other two connected to an ATA RAID controller to store all the working files - data, virtual memory, PS scratch space, printer spool space etc. It would probably take some experimentation to work out the best arrangement of what is where. Anyhow, food for thought for those of you who are getting bored waiting for 50MB scans to load or save, or those who want to scan larger format images. I was under the misapprehension that the Windows swap file had to be on the same drive as the OS. This is definitely NOT true for NT generation OS's (NT 3.51, NT4.x, Win2K). Rob PS Yes, you could do the same thing with SCSI and get better performance, but I am talking best bang for the buck. Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
I have been on the site ... and there was a mark for Mac ... why Windoze only ? Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site - Original Message - From: "Lynn Allen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 12:59 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements Nuh, unh, Tim. Macs are good machines! Pricey, but good. Let's not start another G**ded flame war! Best regards--LRA --Original Message-- From: "Tim Atherton" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: March 28, 2001 5:00:11 PM GMT Subject: RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements I think MAC users are going to become more like 4x5 users - Ilford has discontinued Delta 400 in sheet film "due to lack of demand for the product". A dying breed :) Tim a -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Raymond Carles Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:08:23 -0600, Maris V. Lidaka, Sr. wrote: For those interested, per CNET: "Adobe recently released Photoshop Elements, a new image editor that combines power with simplicity into a single, low-cost graphics package. Try it out here: http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-108-75428.html Maris One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
filmscanners: Printing A3 from a 2700dpi scan
FYI last night I tried my first A3 (not A3+) print from a 2700dpi scan. The image was scanned from 100ASA print film with a Nikon LS30. The result is good, but perhaps not as sharp as I'd like - but for a real test I'll have to do an A3 print from a Provia 100F image. Taking a 2700dpi scan and setting the output dpi to 240dpi makes the print size just inside A3, leaving a nice sized border of around 25mm. Those with 4000dpi scanners will clearly be able to print more easily to full bleed A3, but I'm really not at all disappointed. I'll have to scan a Provia 100F slide on the SS4000 at work and try a comparison print. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: memory for film scanning
I was under the misapprehension that the Windows swap file had to be on the same drive as the OS. This is definitely NOT true for NT generation OS's (NT 3.51, NT4.x, Win2K). Neither for W98 ! In facts I have 2 x U-160 IBM and 1 x U-3 IBM ... and I didn't pay 2 times IDE price (the time I bought them) but still having 2 times the speed of an ATA-100 ;-) You can put 1GB of RAM , but Windoze , Photoshop etc. will EVER go to disk ... and there you pay ! ... you waste minutes ... if you don't have fast disks supported by fast channels. A system is like a body of a man ... it is meaningless to have a huge head over a 20 inches long body. :-) Sincerely. Ezio - Original Message - From: "Rob Geraghty" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 1:46 AM Subject: filmscanners: memory for film scanning The subject has been raised several times recently of how to get faster access to files and better performance when scanning huge files. This is for Windoze folks, so Mac users can delete this message now. ;) Have a look at the Microsoft Knowledge Base article Q123747 titled "Moving the Windows NT Default Paging and Spool File". It explains how to move the virtual memory files and printer spool files in NT4 and Win2K to a different drive. What this allows you to do is arrange your computer so that different physical drives are performing different functions. If data is being read from and written to different drives rather than the same drive, access should be faster. For instance, you could set up your computer with three ATA drives - one for the OS and applications, and the other two connected to an ATA RAID controller to store all the working files - data, virtual memory, PS scratch space, printer spool space etc. It would probably take some experimentation to work out the best arrangement of what is where. Anyhow, food for thought for those of you who are getting bored waiting for 50MB scans to load or save, or those who want to scan larger format images. I was under the misapprehension that the Windows swap file had to be on the same drive as the OS. This is definitely NOT true for NT generation OS's (NT 3.51, NT4.x, Win2K). Rob PS Yes, you could do the same thing with SCSI and get better performance, but I am talking best bang for the buck. Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Re: OT on Windows XP
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 14:27:37 +0200 Ezio ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: The REAL problem it is NOT to HAVE TO PAY a LOT OF MONEY ! to Microsoft, COUGH This discussion is now heading away from filmscanners at warp speed... no more please. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:30:29 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: If you scan into a variety of color spaces, and view them all with PS6, they should all appear the same (PS6 being the necessary software, you cannot do all co-existingly with PS5). The corollary of which is that, scanned into different spaces and viewed in PS5, they all look different in terms of saturation and gamma. And they do. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long)
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 10:30:58 -0600 James L. Sims ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm not a fan of Microsoft Nor am I, but this is one of those OT threads which needs shooting. Please. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Rob writes ... Mark wrote: I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Presumably ... the color space option, "device RGB", is intended for this ... and you would also need Photoshop 6 ... for either (1) assigning the scanner profile of choice ... or (2) opening the scanned image into the device space. Only PS6 allows a device space to be the working space (but who would want to), or the ability for "assigning" an image to a color space. One still nagging question I still have about the "device RGB" option is two differing opinions on how it works. One post, from the user who claimed to have asked for it, claims no transformation takes place and therefore the RGB space is inherently the scanner space. This is the way it should work ... and you would simply assign the scanner profile once it is in Photoshop. However ... Tony seems to be under the impression, for those scanners which have been chracterized, Vuescan will transform the scanned RGB data into "device RGB". (Tony ... correct me if I'm wrong ... I think this is what your 'step-by-step' Vuescan method implied. This implimentation of "device RGB" makes me itchy, because while it is in Ed's evalutated "device RGB" space, it is NOT in the same RGB space as implied by a manufacturer supplied, or 3rd party calibration, device color space. To impose (assign) one on top of the other makes me uncomfortable ... I certainly am more comfortable with the scanned image inheriting the device space because nothing was done to it (... not implying the 'raw' scan' because we are still trying to use Vuescan's cropping tools ...) ...) shAf :o)
filmscanners: What's new in version 7.0.7
What's new in version 7.0.7 * Added preliminary support for SprintScan 120 * Fixed problem with FireWire scanners on Windows * Fixed problem with lamp warmup on some UMAX scanners * Fixed problem exiting when Scan Dual II door is open * Quick change to Preview or Scan tab when button pressed Sincerely. Ezio
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:43:54 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. No, part of his adaptation of VS is to characterise the scanner. But there are a few scanners which, whilst not explicitly supported by named modules (=specifically characterised), seem to work anyway because they share SCSI commands with one which is supported. AFAIK this applies only to flatbeds, but whether the characterisation of the supported scanner is a good fit to any of those is a matter of luck. If it works well, it works well. If not, it's unsupported :) For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? I am certain he will have done so, because I've discussed what he does with him at some length off list. He wouldn't claim to support it otherwise. If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. It's not an option but hard coded and different for each supported scanner. Unfortunately this places it beyond experimentation. IWBNI he provided a 'Pro' version at higher cost which allowed you to derive your own characterisations from any film and for your own scanner (either VS-unique code, or ICM), but someone would have to go into business producing suitably toleranced targets on a variety of materials. A can of big fat worms. I need to play with this option ... I simply opened VS yesterday to inspect the help file and look and feel of the v.7 GUI. If I catch the gist of current users of this option, I may well end up in the color space I want by "assigning" the 3-D LUT profile upon opening ... The profile which came with your scanner I presume? Yes, that should work (with a raw scan), but you won't have any access to film characterisations unless the scanner mfr provides different profiles for those, instead of the more common generic neg or pos ones. altho it would have been better to go straight to it via a "color space = 'none'" option so I could take advantage of IR cleaning. I see. You want blood for $40, you do :) I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... Last time someone said that of VS, ISTR Ed took exception and pointed out VS does no more and no less than ICM, except not give you a tag. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
filmscanners: Nikon Coolscan 4000ED Review
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/nikon_coolscan4000.html The review is not an experienced user of filmscanners so he spends most of his words running down the features and tech of the scanner instead of the stuff people on this list would want to know, like grain aliasing, resolution, noise, etc. He also focuses alot on the ASF technologies and provides some good examples of ICE and ROC restoration of some really bad negs.
RE: filmscanners: Adobe Elements
They add up how many jelly beans they get from each platform, and guess who wins hands down? Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Raymond Carles Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 8:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Adobe Elements One more Windows only application... Macintosh users have made Adobe's reputation but they are now treated as second class clients. I know what I'm talking about as I'm a Photoshop power user since v.2 now working with a buggy 6.0 version... -- Have a good day! Raymond Carles
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Tony writes ... On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:43:54 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... Last time someone said that of VS, ISTR Ed took exception and pointed out VS does no more and no less than ICM, except not give you a tag. I meant it only in the context of what you seemed to imply ... VS offering only trismuthus matrix tranformations. It is apparently something quite rigorous to impliment and tranform 3-dimensional LUT-type device profiles. I believe Ed would have to license the Adobe or Kodak rendering engines to offer this. As you noted I expect a lot for $40 ... but not really ... I only want an understanding of Ed's implimentations, and strive for clearing up any confusions. For example ... to ask for AdobeRGB from VS, and then see the image in VS's window is terribly confusing ... that is, until you understand why. shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
--- shAf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tony writes ... On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. I believe Vuescan probably still only really works to sRGB internally, so when you select a wider output space such as AdobeRGB, sRGB gamut occupies a subset of that space. It is important to realize if the observation is "more saturated as viewed with Vuescan" OR "as viewed with Photoshop". If the observation is with respect to Vuescan, sRGB or AdobeRGB data is viewed in monitor space, in which case AdobeRGB will naturally appear less saturated, and sRGB be appear more correct because it is a psuedo-monitor space. If you scan into a variety of color spaces, and view them all with PS6, they should all appear the same (PS6 being the necessary software, you cannot do all co-existingly with PS5). shAf :o) Well, of course viewing in PS6. For me, there is no point in trying to evaluate an image by viewing within Vuescan! So, yes they appear different in PS6, with each image in its respective color space. Jon __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan 7.0.7 released
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 23:07:02 +0200, you wrote: Hamrick Software - http://www.hamrick.com/ VueScan 7.0.7 Release Notes March 28, 2001 What's new in version 7.0.7 * Added preliminary support for SprintScan 120 * Fixed problem with FireWire scanners on Windows * Fixed problem with lamp warmup on some UMAX scanners * Fixed problem exiting when Scan Dual II door is open * Quick change to Preview or Scan tab when button pressed (Ezio, you have to scroll down a fair bit to find the "what's new in.." section, but thanks for the FYI).
Re: filmscanners: Printing A3 from a 2700dpi scan
Rob: Why don't you try a Fuji REALA negative at that size? Mike M. Rob Geraghty wrote: FYI last night I tried my first A3 (not A3+) print from a 2700dpi scan. The image was scanned from 100ASA print film with a Nikon LS30. The result is good, but perhaps not as sharp as I'd like - but for a real test I'll have to do an A3 print from a Provia 100F image. Taking a 2700dpi scan and setting the output dpi to 240dpi makes the print size just inside A3, leaving a nice sized border of around 25mm. Those with 4000dpi scanners will clearly be able to print more easily to full bleed A3, but I'm really not at all disappointed. I'll have to scan a Provia 100F slide on the SS4000 at work and try a comparison print. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
filmscanners: Re: What's new in version 7.0.7
At 3:20 AM +0200 3/29/01, Ezio wrote: What's new in version 7.0.7 * Added preliminary support for SprintScan 120 * Fixed problem with FireWire scanners on Windows * Fixed problem with lamp warmup on some UMAX scanners * Fixed problem exiting when Scan Dual II door is open * Quick change to Preview or Scan tab when button pressed. The last item is well worth the time to download VS 7.0.7. I found it awkward not to have an image to watch and compare to while VueScan was making a Preview/Memory or Scan/Memory change. Regards, Roger Smith
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Michael wrote: Rob writes ... How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Presumably ... the color space option, "device RGB", is intended for this ... and you would also need Photoshop 6 ... for either (1) assigning the scanner profile of choice ... or (2) opening the scanned image into the device space. Only PS6 allows a device space to be the working space (but who would want to), or the ability for "assigning" an image to a color space. Er, doesn't PS 5.5 allow you to say what profile the image is coming from when the image is untagged? Does "Device RGB" invert a negative, or is the output still raw and without the mask removed? Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: Scanning dpi and epson papers was Re: filmscanners: Repro house skirmishing (l
In fairness to Epson, the full technical specs of all their papers is available on their various national web sites. But to be honest, I don't think they make a paper you would describe as photo weight. Epson printers have relatively straight-through paper paths, but they still have a limit on the weight of paper they can reliably feed, even one sheet at a time. If you really want something chunky and weighty, why not get into mounting or even laminating? As far as your scanning ppi question goes, a little run through will answer that. If you scan a 24x36mm negative or slide at 300 ppi and then print it at 300ppi, what will be the size of the resulting picture? 24x36mm! You need a MUCH higher scanning resolution than printing resolution because you want to print the picture at a much larger size than the negative. A 2700dpi scan implies a 9x magnification factor, so your 300ppi print will come out at 216x324 mm, or slightly larger than A4. A 4000dpi scan will allow you to print at 320x480 at 300ppi, or a bit larger than A3. So always scan slides and negs at the best resolution you can get. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Geraghty) wrote: Art wrote: When I mentioned to the Epson rep at Comdex that the names of the papers were ridiculously confusing, he looked at me like I was from another planet What's worse is that the price lists don't include the gsm or thickness of the paper. That would at least help to separate the "photo weight" papers from the "photo quality" but lightweight papers. Most of the photographers aren't at all interested in lightweight papers, I expect. Obscanning: What dpi do people scan at? I scan on the LS30 at 2700dpi then change the dpi in the file without resampling before I print. Do others scan at 300dpi (say) for the print output resolution? This isn't possible AFAIK with Vuesc, but it is with Nikonscan. Rob PS No arguments abuot dpi vs ppi please - I'm talking about the labels used in the software not what is "technically correct". Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: scanning/photoshop workstation (long)
I like RAID10 , i.e. mirroring and striping, because you can still use cheap IDE RAID controllers but get similar reliability to a RAID5 array at the cost of one more cheap drive. I've just built my current most powerful box with a RAID 10 array of four 30 Gig drives , giving 60 Gig of reliable storage for £450 which is comparable to the cost of just one smaller SCSI disc. You may realise I no longer regard a CD-R as _big_! I use 30 Gig drives in removable carriers as my main backup medium now - they cost only slightly more than a 1G Jaz cartridge... [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Ross) wrote: I would just use raid0 for workspace, i.e. on the order of 2-4 fast ~5GB disks. Maybe one set for swap and one pair for files. Once the work is done, park the results on something big cheap ( burn a CD or DVD). Bill Ross
Re: filmscanners: OT-ish Epson 1270, was Repro house..
Photo Glossy Film used to be the premier product in the range, but I'm not so sure these days. It's officially rated only capable of 720dpi I believe. I really like Premium SemiGloss paper and Heavyweight Matte myself. I tried both of these on an Epson 890 I had briefly , but haven't got around to trying them on my 1200 yet. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arthur Entlich) wrote: Regarding output prints from Epson printers for consideration as material for color separations, today I took a closer look at some samples of the same image printed on Epson Glossy film versus Premium Glossy Photo Paper and Photo Glossy Paper. Although the difference is not huge, the glossy film did provide better detail and deeper, less posterized, color. (the samples were printed with Photo 700/750 models). Although the glossy film does cost a minor arm and leg, for repro purposes, it might just be worth it. I wonder if some of this increased resolution is because it is so thin that the heads are a bit further away from the "paper" surface, allowing for less splatter or "velocity related dot gain" (my terms)? If not, I would be nice if Epson could take this film with its coatings and adhere it to a heavier bases, since it is vulnerable to kinks. It is a pretty amazing product in terms of print quality, but inappropriate for most applications due to its flimsy nature and cost. Art Tony Sleep wrote: On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:45:20 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Obscanning: I have yet to try printing at A3, but do those who have printed at A3 from 2700dpi scans find the scanning resolution adequate?
Re: filmscanners: 7.0.6 Great !
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 10:29:28 -0700, you wrote: Under Win98SE Vuescan 7.0.6 repeatedly hangs my SS 4000. Went back to ver 6.4 (been away awhile) and works fine. Already sent Ed log files. 7.0.6 causes my SCSI HP Photosmart scanner to change from "negative" to "print" mode halfway through a scan with disastrous results for the last frame on the negative strip as it gets eaten by the scanner. Went back to 7.0 and the scanner works fine, but Vuescan can't get rid of the scratches sigh. Yuri.
RE: filmscanners: memory for film scanning
Rob wrote: For instance, you could set up your computer with three ATA drives - one for the OS and applications, and the other two connected to an ATA RAID controller to store all the working files - data, virtual memory, PS scratch space, printer spool space etc. I just checked the Promise web site and their ATA100 RAID controller supports up to 4 drives and multiple arrays. This gives you more choices about how to configure things, including having two striped arrays - one for the OS and one for the data. BTW it's probably best to leave the swap space on the same drive as the OS, but I would try moving the PS scratch space and printer spool directories to the data drive. Rather than start another thread which could be viewed as of little connection with actual scanning, please respond off the list if you wish to discuss this further. I simply wanted to raise the suggestion for others who may be frustrated by the time it takes to load and save files. Rob PS I use a Promise controller (non-RAID) and found it would only behave when the motherboard IDE interface was disabled. This may not be an issue in Win2K or NT, or with other motherboards. Something to bear in mind - because you will probably want to plug the ATA CDROM in somewhere... Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
Jon I have been scanning into sRGB. I'll be using these scans on the web ultimately so I assumed that was the way to go. I also leave the scanner on all the time so the warmup thing is not an issue. I haven't looked over Margulis much yet, or had time to try any of the suggestions people on the list have made. I may also my need to rethink what I'm really trying to accomplish. I looked again at some of the things I did and I've been trying to recall what the scenes looked like *when I took the photographs* IOW, if I start out with a dull scene, can I really expect it to look much better after scanning? :-) If I can get to where my scans are a fairly close approximation to what I started with, I'll be a lot happier. At this point I'm probably better off than I could be. If I was scanning and had both the highs and lows gone, ( whites blown out, shadows with no detail) there wouldn't be much I could do to fix things. Face it, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it... -- Jim Jon wrote: Well, Margulis is a can of worms, in my opinion, unless you have a CMYK workflow. One thing that might help is to set your output to sRGB in Vuescan. sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. Also make sure your scanner is warmed up properly. Jon --- Jim Sharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone who replied to this! I downloaded the Margulis .pdf files suggested and will study them closely. I'm hoping that will help. I also intent to try a few of the adjustments in Vuescan that I've yet to experiment with. I'll let you all know how I fare... -- Jim __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Take a look at the Photoscientia site, www.photoscientia.co.uk. As for me..(amateur opinion follows!) I have the Acer 2720, and I like it very much. Neutral, slightly undersaturated colors (a very slight cyan/blue cast on mine, easy to correct). Good shadow detail and very little shadow noise in slide scans. Good optics, little or no flare or CCD 'bleeding'. Has autoexposure only - can be a problem for some high-end uses, but not for me. Has some problems with grain-aliasing in negatives, but I think most/all 2720 scanners do.. The 2740 is the same scanner, but with Infrared-based dust/scratch removal. (I understand this function slows the scans dramatically when turned on..) Have heard of folk using them on a Mac, but not me. Just my 2c worth.. MT At 01:04 PM 28/03/01 EST, you wrote: There are a bunch of Acer Scanwit 2740S scanners on Ebay. Is this a competent machine? Anyone using one on a Mac? Rich
Re: filmscanners: Printing A3 from a 2700dpi scan
Rob: Why don't you try a Fuji REALA negative at that size? Reala suffers from grain aliasing on the LS30 just as badly as pretty much every other neg film I've tried. It would be better than the old kodak neg, but a better one to try would be Provia 100F for a complete lack of grain. Then I can be more certain that any patterning on the print is the printer not the film. I wish I had more time to devote to all this stuff. I'll probably have to arrange to take a few days off work so I can really make some progress. For instance I'd love to try scanning a T400CN frame exposed at EI250 to see just how much "grain" it shows in the LS30 - because on the enlarger using a floor projection the grain is incredibly fine. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Rob writes ...
Er, doesn't PS 5.5 allow you to say what profile the
image is coming from when the image is untagged?
Yes ... but it seems to me that list of profiles is particular to
working spaces, excluding device profiles ... or maybe I'm wrong. If
so, then it should work for PS5 as well.
Does "Device RGB" invert a negative, or is the output
still raw and without the mask removed?
Altho I haven't had a chance to play with this option, that would
seem to be it's purpose ... so you can fully process ("crop") and
leave the RGB data in the color space it was scanned into.
shAf :o)
Re: Scanning dpi and epson papers was Re: filmscanners: Repro house skirmishing (l
Derek wrote: [epson stuff snipped] If you scan a 24x36mm negative or slide at 300 ppi and then print it at 300ppi, what will be the size of the resulting picture? 24x36mm! OK, perhaps the question may have been confusing due to some assumptions I made. In Vuescan, AFAIK you don't get to alter the relationship between PPI and the DPI which is encoded into the resulting file. There was an option somwhere for "get the dpi from" I think, but I confess I haven't investigated it. Anyway, using the default settings in Vuescan if you scan with an LS30 you get a 2700dpi file. By contrast, in Nikonscan you can scan at 2700ppi but output a file which has a setting of 300dpi encoded into it - so the printed size would be much bigger. A 2700dpi scan implies a 9x magnification factor, so your 300ppi print will come out at 216x324 mm, or slightly larger than A4. Yes, Nikonscan has a maximum "magnification" of 900%. It's not really magnification at all - it's just the relationship between the pixels and the encoded dpi. So always scan slides and negs at the best resolution you can get. There's reasons I would want to do otherwise, but not when I want to print the scan on my Epson. Presumably the answer to my question is that most people (if not everyone) scans a source file at 2700dpi (or whatever their maximum optical scanner resolution is) and change the output dpi later in Photoshop or whatever editor they use. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
