Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
At 10:06 PM 6/04/01 -0400, you wrote: Review of the new Nikon CoolScan 4000 at the Imaging Resource Newsletter: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IRNEWS/ Interesting article, but I start to question it when I read: quote In all our prior film scanner reviews, the highest resolution we'd encountered was about 2800 dpi. Since film grain was fairly evident at that resolution, we felt there was little purpose in going to even higher resolutions, since we reasoned that would emphasize film grain even further. endquote Eeek. I thought grain-aliasing and film resolution was covered in either lesson 1 or 2 when you do Filmscanning 101..! :) And they haven't encountered 4000 dpi before... Maybe the full review will be better..
Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
Art: You have apparently read more about CD-RW than I have... I agree that the phase change method of recording has a potentially longer life than the dye based CD-R media... However, what I have read is that the best practise for making long lived discs for use in different CD readers is to use the CD-R gold (or now gold/silver) and record it slowly, only filling up about 550Mb... Who the devil knows what the truth is... We will (or our kids will) know in 20,30 and 100 years from now how well this whole move to digital from silver holds up... I am sure that there will be a lot of silver based negs and slides that will reside in museums, etc. that will have stood the test of time... CD media are a different game entirely... Mike M. Arthur Entlich wrote: Just wondering if you have heard anything that makes CD-RW less archival than CD-R, if one is using it as an internal media (not for supplying to others). I suspect it might be more stable than CD-R dyes, but haven't read anything definitive. Have you? Art Michael Moore wrote: ReWritable is NOT preferable... CD-R media is cheap enought that you don't need to mess with all the variables of trying to rewrite a CD file... What I and lot of other folks on this list do is to use the best CD-R (not CD-RW) discs we can get ahold of (Kodaks Optima Gold or Gold-Silver are great) to archive our images... what counts is 1. The ability of your disc to be read by multiple users (in other words your clients or lab) 2. Archival and Information quality... If you want to work on a file, you pull it up off your Master Files (the ones that include your original scans, pre-manipulation, as well as the Master manipulated files) CD, do whatever tweaks are necessary, then save it as a separate file... And burn it onto a new CD-R... costs about a buck for a new disc... Mike M.
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
The dust mote strikes again You could call this situation "the looping cycle" this happens because there is a dust particle sitting on the 'registration' sensor, the one which sets the carrier into the 'start' position... since it is blinded by the dust spek, it keeps the carrier moving back and forth, for as long as it will take to find the 'registration' indicator on the film carrier... which might be eternity time... blowing air into the left channel located into the tunnel should dislodge the disruptive dust speck... the sensor 'sits' in this area... also a good precaution, is to blow air onto the carrier, specially the under channel on the left side...to remove any dust which might then finds its way on this sensor... the only thing, keep the air can upright while using it, other wise... funny how a dust mote can blind a sensor searching for a unique marking, into an 'eternal' movement, but this kind of situations happens all the time, around us Tom Scales wrote: My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide carrier. Whoopee. Didn't do a thing. Am I just SOL? Do I have to send it to Polaroid? How big a stickler are they on your original invoice? I can't find it. I do have the original box, which shows it was shipped to me less than a year ago and that is what I'll send it to them in. I just hope I don't have a fight for warranty service. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Tom
filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...
You want the best possible quality. However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to increase production throughput. Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to you, so money is no object. So what do you buy? Jeremy Nicholl
Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...
To heck with the slides and the scanner ;-) Thanks to dearly departed rich Uncle Charlie, I'm living in the Bahamas on my yacht, drinking coconut daiquiris, and I've hired someone else to scan the thousands of slides and figure out which scanner (s)he needs to do it. ;-) Art Jeremy Nicholl wrote: You want the best possible quality. However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to increase production throughput. Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to you, so money is no object. So what do you buy? Jeremy Nicholl
Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
Rob, Read my detailed discussion. CD-RW do not use dyes. They use a amorphous crystal layer. Report from another subscriber is that they last 30 years, while the best CD-Rs can last 100 years. Art Rob Geraghty wrote: I haven't heard anything definitive either, but logically CDRW disks would be *less* stable than CDR as the dyes are designed to be reset. Rob
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
Tom Scales wrote: My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide carrier. Whoopee. Didn't do a thing. Well, in fairness to Polaroid, some units had problems like you describe due to a dirty sensor, apparently. Did you thoroughly clean the area they suggested? Art
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
"Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. Have you tried Vuescan? Does it work? Rob
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
Yes, followed every one of their instructions. More than once. I understand the problem, but it does seem like a poor design. Tom Tom Scales wrote: My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide carrier. Whoopee. Didn't do a thing. Well, in fairness to Polaroid, some units had problems like you describe due to a dirty sensor, apparently. Did you thoroughly clean the area they suggested? Art
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
Been there, tried that g. First thing I tried, as I had heard that advice, but I'll try it again. Thanks, Tom The dust mote strikes again You could call this situation "the looping cycle" this happens because there is a dust particle sitting on the 'registration' sensor, the one which sets the carrier into the 'start' position... since it is blinded by the dust spek, it keeps the carrier moving back and forth, for as long as it will take to find the 'registration' indicator on the film carrier... which might be eternity time... blowing air into the left channel located into the tunnel should dislodge the disruptive dust speck... the sensor 'sits' in this area... also a good precaution, is to blow air onto the carrier, specially the under channel on the left side...to remove any dust which might then finds its way on this sensor... the only thing, keep the air can upright while using it, other wise... funny how a dust mote can blind a sensor searching for a unique marking, into an 'eternal' movement, but this kind of situations happens all the time, around us Tom Scales wrote: My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide carrier. Whoopee. Didn't do a thing. Am I just SOL? Do I have to send it to Polaroid? How big a stickler are they on your original invoice? I can't find it. I do have the original box, which shows it was shipped to me less than a year ago and that is what I'll send it to them in. I just hope I don't have a fight for warranty service. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Tom
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
The latest release of Vuescan is supposed to support the 4000. Tom "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. Have you tried Vuescan? Does it work? Rob
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
Thanks for the advice on handling Polaroid. I always try to be nice and respectful. I think that gets the best service. I'm not really willing to spend $250 a year to keep their product working, since I'm just a hobbyist. If that is really a requirement, maybe it's time to try the Nikon g. Tom I'm not sure if this will go to the mailing list, as there seems to be some problem with the mailing list not posting my submissions to the list. So, I included you in the to: line as well. My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide carrier. Whoopee. Didn't do a thing. nope -- I've had that problem several times. You have to tell them to take it back. I've noticed recently that the support people at polaroid will try to do or say anything they can to avoid sending you a new scanner. While on the surface that seems reasonable, they push it beyond fair and reasonable. If it weren't for my vast experience in having to send that d*amn scanner back so often due to internal problems, I'd have made the same mistake you did. Even now, I'm having problems with my scanner, and they were supposed to have sent me a new one all week. hasn't arrived yet. now the promise monday. Don't misunderstand this: I never had a problem with my SS4000 when I first got it, and I was surprised when I heard about all these people having problems with it, but when it started happening to me, I realized I'd better buy an extended service contract. For $250 a year, they'll send a replacement unit OVERNIGHT (you send your back in the box that included the new unit), but you still have to remind the support person constantly that, yes, the contract says to send one overnight. Am I just SOL? Do I have to send it to Polaroid? You have to go through tech support to give you an return authorization number. If you don't have the receipt, you could have a problem, but like getting first class upgrades at the gate, it's entirely at the discresion of the bureaucrat on the phone. When they send you the replacement (loaner) unit, you send back the defective one in the same box. (They provide a shipping lable for you.) -- --dan Photo Gallery: http://www.danheller.com/
Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...
Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with the optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time. Tom You want the best possible quality. However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to increase production throughput. Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to you, so money is no object. So what do you buy? Jeremy Nicholl
filmscanners: CD Burning
Thanks for the helpful advice. Burt
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again
And they said a perpetual motion machine could not be constructed . . . Maris - Original Message - From: "heriltd" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 3:34 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 problems - again | The dust mote strikes again | | You could call this situation "the looping cycle" | | this happens because there is a dust particle sitting on the | 'registration' sensor, the one which sets the carrier into the 'start' | position... | since it is blinded by the dust spek, it keeps the carrier moving back | and forth, for as long as it will take to find the 'registration' | indicator on the film carrier... which might be eternity time... | blowing air into the left channel located into the tunnel should | dislodge the disruptive dust speck... the sensor 'sits' in this area... | also a good precaution, is to blow air onto the carrier, specially the | under channel on the left side...to remove any dust which might then | finds its way on this sensor... | | the only thing, keep the air can upright while using it, other wise... | | funny how a dust mote can blind a sensor searching for a unique marking, | into an 'eternal' movement, but this kind of situations happens all the | time, around us | | | Tom Scales wrote: | | My SS4000 has developed a problem where the yellow light just continues to | flash and the motor runs on and on. I called Polaroid and they sent me a | 'cleaning kit', really just a little brush that attaches to the slide | carrier. | | Whoopee. | | Didn't do a thing. | | Am I just SOL? Do I have to send it to Polaroid? | | How big a stickler are they on your original invoice? I can't find it. I do | have the original box, which shows it was shipped to me less than a year ago | and that is what I'll send it to them in. | | I just hope I don't have a fight for warranty service. | | Any thoughts would be appreciated. | | Thanks, | | Tom |
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Rob Geraghty wrote: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. Have you tried Vuescan? Does it work? Yes, it works quickly and (so far) reliably. Howver, I have difficulties with the color management. Nikon Scan 3 produces well balanced colour without manipulation. None of Vuescans 7.0.12 color balances comes even close to being reasonable. I also miss Nikon Scan's curve control (I have figured out how to use the new LCH dialog properly). Also I cannot find Vuescan's ICE GEM option (is there one?) With the LS2000, I prefered Silverfast to Nikon Scan 2.51 because of the better colour manipulation options. To sink further down to Vuescan's limited controls would not be acceptable to me. Jeremy
Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
Mike wrote: We will (or our kids will) know in 20,30 and 100 years from now how well this whole move to digital from silver holds up... I am sure that there will be a lot of silver based negs and slides that will reside in museums, etc. that will have stood the test of time... Be that as it may, as the "Family Archiver" I'm going by 2 "golden" rules: repeated redundancy, and save the originals! :-) Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
"Arthur Entlich" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Read my detailed discussion. CD-RW do not use dyes. They use a amorphous crystal layer. Report from another subscriber is that they last 30 years, while the best CD-Rs can last 100 years. Point taken, nevertheless one is designed for write-once-read-many and the other is designed to be rewritten. One thing which seems clear from this discussion is that there's no consensus on how long these things will last - mostly because they haven't been around long enough to know for sure. Rob
Re: filmscanners: Newbie question alert: you asked for it...
My Minolta QS-35 (since sold) did the same thing. ? in device manager, worked fine. I wasted a lot of time trying to get rid of that question mark... Tom Based on list discussion I had a Minolta Scan Elite over-nighted to my door. I spent the afternoon and evening trying to get it to run on two different SCSI machines only to discover in a conversation with tech support that it installed correctly (it shows with a ? in device manager)..curious but ok. I purchased Vuescan and am busy trying to learn the ropes. I've tried scanning with ICE and w/o and am elated. The scanner with the IR channel is such an improvement over the HP Photosmart. What I'm looking for is a primer on initial settings and a guide to workflow. Any suggestions are appreciated. Kurt Simpson Editor Dual Sport News
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Jeremy Please take a real sharp slide ( glassles) and select the auto focus in the middle of the picture and scan the slide ( standard mode) Move the auto focus setting out from the middle against the side of the picture and scan. Compare the information in the middle and corner of the 2 slides. Don't tell me that you not can se a big difference in the sharpness I have done this test on 2 different ED 4000 and same results. Best Regards Mikael Risedal From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 09:05:26 +0200 Rob Geraghty wrote: Hopefully someone will produce a more balanced review - hopefully comparing the Nikon 4000 with another 4000dpi scanner. I got my 4000 last week. I can only compare it to the 2000. It is clearly a major improvement - the improvment in dynamic range is noticeable - the higher resolution does show more detail and not just film grain. - I do appreciate the firewire connectivity over SCSI - I have no problems with edge to edge sharpness / film curvature with the (glassless) slide mounts I use. But. The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. In general each and every scan will crash (in one of several dlls). I have found a technique to avoid the crashes but I need to do the preview / manipulation, scan and save as TIFF in three separate starts of the product. Totally unacceptable. The software is not labelled as beta but its quality is not even of beta level. Other than scratch removal, I have not played with ICE as it is guaranteed to crash my scans. Perhaps Silverfast will support the scanner in the near future. I have never had much faith in Nikon software. Rob PS I have no doubt the Nikon 4000 is a nice scanner. :) Yes, it is a "nice" scanner, shame about the software Jeremy Brookfield _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Jeremy Please take a real sharp slide ( glassles) and select the auto focus in the middle of the picture and scan the slide ( standard mode) Move the auto focus setting out from the middle against the side of the picture and scan. Compare the information in the middle and corner of the 2 slides. Don't tell me that you not can se a big difference in the sharpness I have done this test on 2 different ED 4000 and same results. Best Regards Mikael Risedal From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 09:05:26 +0200 Rob Geraghty wrote: Hopefully someone will produce a more balanced review - hopefully comparing the Nikon 4000 with another 4000dpi scanner. I got my 4000 last week. I can only compare it to the 2000. It is clearly a major improvement - the improvment in dynamic range is noticeable - the higher resolution does show more detail and not just film grain. - I do appreciate the firewire connectivity over SCSI - I have no problems with edge to edge sharpness / film curvature with the (glassless) slide mounts I use. But. The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. In general each and every scan will crash (in one of several dlls). I have found a technique to avoid the crashes but I need to do the preview / manipulation, scan and save as TIFF in three separate starts of the product. Totally unacceptable. The software is not labelled as beta but its quality is not even of beta level. Other than scratch removal, I have not played with ICE as it is guaranteed to crash my scans. Perhaps Silverfast will support the scanner in the near future. I have never had much faith in Nikon software. Rob PS I have no doubt the Nikon 4000 is a nice scanner. :) Yes, it is a "nice" scanner, shame about the software Jeremy Brookfield _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Jeremy Please take a real sharp slide ( glassles) and select the auto focus in the middle of the picture and scan the slide ( standard mode) Move the auto focus setting out from the middle against the side of the picture and scan. Compare the information in the middle and corner of the 2 slides. Don't tell me that you not can se a big difference in the sharpness I have done this test on 2 different ED 4000 and same results. Best Regards Mikael Risedal From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 09:05:26 +0200 Rob Geraghty wrote: Hopefully someone will produce a more balanced review - hopefully comparing the Nikon 4000 with another 4000dpi scanner. I got my 4000 last week. I can only compare it to the 2000. It is clearly a major improvement - the improvment in dynamic range is noticeable - the higher resolution does show more detail and not just film grain. - I do appreciate the firewire connectivity over SCSI - I have no problems with edge to edge sharpness / film curvature with the (glassless) slide mounts I use. But. The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. In general each and every scan will crash (in one of several dlls). I have found a technique to avoid the crashes but I need to do the preview / manipulation, scan and save as TIFF in three separate starts of the product. Totally unacceptable. The software is not labelled as beta but its quality is not even of beta level. Other than scratch removal, I have not played with ICE as it is guaranteed to crash my scans. Perhaps Silverfast will support the scanner in the near future. I have never had much faith in Nikon software. Rob PS I have no doubt the Nikon 4000 is a nice scanner. :) Yes, it is a "nice" scanner, shame about the software Jeremy Brookfield _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Vuescan's "Clean" option on the Filters tab is the ICE control. Maris - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 9:27 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 | | | Rob Geraghty wrote: | | "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless | to | all intents and purposes. | | Have you tried Vuescan? Does it work? | | Yes, it works quickly and (so far) reliably. Howver, I have difficulties with | the color management. Nikon Scan 3 produces well balanced colour without | manipulation. None of Vuescans 7.0.12 color balances comes even close to being | reasonable. I also miss Nikon Scan's curve control (I have figured out how to | use the new LCH dialog properly). Also I cannot find Vuescan's ICE GEM option | (is there one?) With the LS2000, I prefered Silverfast to Nikon Scan 2.51 | because of the better colour manipulation options. To sink further down to | Vuescan's limited controls would not be acceptable to me. | | Jeremy | | |
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
Jeremy Please take a real sharp slide ( glassles) and select the auto focus in the middle of the picture and scan the slide ( standard mode) Move the auto focus setting out from the middle against the side of the picture and scan. Compare the information in the middle and corner of the 2 slides. Don't tell me that you not can se a big difference in the sharpness I have done this test on 2 different ED 4000 and same results. Best Regards Mikael Risedal From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 09:05:26 +0200 Rob Geraghty wrote: Hopefully someone will produce a more balanced review - hopefully comparing the Nikon 4000 with another 4000dpi scanner. I got my 4000 last week. I can only compare it to the 2000. It is clearly a major improvement - the improvment in dynamic range is noticeable - the higher resolution does show more detail and not just film grain. - I do appreciate the firewire connectivity over SCSI - I have no problems with edge to edge sharpness / film curvature with the (glassless) slide mounts I use. But. The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. In general each and every scan will crash (in one of several dlls). I have found a technique to avoid the crashes but I need to do the preview / manipulation, scan and save as TIFF in three separate starts of the product. Totally unacceptable. The software is not labelled as beta but its quality is not even of beta level. Other than scratch removal, I have not played with ICE as it is guaranteed to crash my scans. Perhaps Silverfast will support the scanner in the near future. I have never had much faith in Nikon software. Rob PS I have no doubt the Nikon 4000 is a nice scanner. :) Yes, it is a "nice" scanner, shame about the software Jeremy Brookfield _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
filmscanners: Coolscan IV
My Coolscan IV is about two weeks old. I have been switching between Nikon Scan 3.0 used as a TWAIN import for Photoshop 6 and Vuescan (7.0.10 to date). Nikon Scan 3.0 has worked without the crashes that some have complained of. Nikon Scan wors flawlessly on my system - my OS is Win 98SE. So far the Coolscan IV has been very satisfying. Vuescan has not performed any better that Nikon Scan 3.0. Nikon Scan seems to scan color negatives better than Vuescan. The analog gain in Nikon Scan is better that using Vuescan multi passes for dark slides. That is all for my observations to date.
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
To get to VueScan's ICE equivalent use any cleaning mode. To get to the ICE GEM equivalent go to the medium or high cleaning modes. Gordon Jeremy Brookfield wrote: Rob Geraghty wrote: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The software (Nikon Scan 3.0) is so buggy as to render the scanner useless to all intents and purposes. Have you tried Vuescan? Does it work? Yes, it works quickly and (so far) reliably. Howver, I have difficulties with the color management. Nikon Scan 3 produces well balanced colour without manipulation. None of Vuescans 7.0.12 color balances comes even close to being reasonable. I also miss Nikon Scan's curve control (I have figured out how to use the new LCH dialog properly). Also I cannot find Vuescan's ICE GEM option (is there one?) With the LS2000, I prefered Silverfast to Nikon Scan 2.51 because of the better colour manipulation options. To sink further down to Vuescan's limited controls would not be acceptable to me. Jeremy
Re: filmscanners: Coolscan IV
Douglas writes ... ... Nikon Scan 3.0 has worked without the crashes that some have complained of. Nikon Scan wors flawlessly on my system - my OS is Win 98SE. I think this says more for the maturity of the device drivers for this OS, than the Nikon programmers, although they certainly have been given plenty of time to mature too. Let's keep an eye on some of the particulars ... if someone else posts a problem, maybe we can figure out what's different between your computer and theirs. E.G., what type of hardware controls your scanner ... USB, firewire, SCSI? So far the Coolscan IV has been very satisfying. Vuescan has not performed any better that Nikon Scan 3.0. Nikon Scan seems to scan color negatives better than Vuescan. Someone else has posted experiencing problems with focussing their new Nikon ... as if the sensor had a VERY shallow depth of focus, that is, VERY sensitive to film flatness. What has your experience been?? The analog gain in Nikon Scan is better that using Vuescan multi passes for dark slides. ... NS "analog gain" would be more analogous with Vuescan's manual control of "exposure". Also, let us know what color space profiles NS allow you to choose from ... which is primarly why I scan with VS ... for wide gamut options, "Adobe wide" is a terrible highbit editing space (altho it is well understood and there shouldn't be any problem in converting from there to another). But, it would be better if NS allowed for choosing the LS-40's own device space, a specific ICM file, or creating 'raw' RGB. shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: MDSD2
Re: Emulsion side up or down... it really doesn't matter as far as I can tell... all you have to do is flip the image in PShop or whatever program you're using. Mike M. Rome wrote: Hey guys, Finally got my Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II back from the shop, a new replacement actually. Seems to be working this time. The Italian's came through okay. That's what I was worried about, as in the past I've heard quite a few horror stories about stores in Italy who won't exchange faulty goods. But as it's turned out okay, then in good faith, I'm now happy to give the dealer a plug: If you're ever in Rome, Italy and need a good, well-stocked, pro-oriented photography or digital imaging dealer, go to - Fotoforniture Guido Sabatini Via Germanico, 168/a Tel: 063207278 Fax: 063210304 They also have a website at: http://imago.tin.it/sabatini/ though it's difficult to pull any solid information about stock or prices off this site. Anyway, visit if you're in town. Their prices are a little weird - Incredibly expensive for some things (over book price!!), but really bargain priced for others. My Minolta was about 25 percent less than it would have cost me in England, so they do have some good deals. But they do have a huge stock (lighting, everything) and a separate digital department. They supply the local movie industry (at CineCitta) too, so it's the closest thing you'll find to BH in Rome, as far as I know. Incidentally, I'm getting a little sick of having to type the whole of 'Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II' each time. Sort of a mouthful that you wouldn't have thought was very good for marketing purposes would you? Either I save it in autotext, or else let's start calling it the MDSD2 huh? What I'd really like to know now, is if the question that someone asked last week on the list has been aswered yet, about which way up the negs are supposed to go in the DSD2 film holder. The manual booklet says emulsion side up, the pdf manual is diffrently worded but even more emphatic about putting them in emulsion up - yet logic says it should be emulsion side down. Which is it? Bye, Adam
Re: filmscanners: Newbie question alert: you asked for it...
Kurt: 1. I would suggest you get familiar with the scanner and workflow by using the Minolta software at first... it's extremely user friendly... you may find you won't need to master Vuescan... 2. I have Scan Elite and use it for color negs... I use the 16 bit linear scan setting (which imports the neg into Photoshop as a neg) with ICE turned on and number of passes set for 2 (unless I am dealing with a particularly dirty neg, then I increase the number of passes) For largest image size at 300DPI out, use the max scan DPI of 2820 with 300 DPI out... 3. I always use PhotoShop's TWAIN import to get the scan from the scanner into PSHOP... This opens the Minolta software within PShop...This scan will take several minutes (depending on the number of passes) 4. Don't use your computer for anything else while the scan is running.. when the scan has completed, you will have a negative image (if you are scanning negs ) in Photoshop you can then close the Minolta software and either save the neg scan (which I do in any case) or work on it as a 16 bit file, then convert it to 8 bits for final output... I always save my 16 bit corrected file, and the final 8 bit file If you are working with negs, let me know and I will summarize how I am dealing with those in PShop to get a good positive image without going through too many gyrations in color correction, etc. Mike M. "Kurt Simpson (Dual Sport News)" wrote: Based on list discussion I had a Minolta Scan Elite over-nighted to my door. I spent the afternoon and evening trying to get it to run on two different SCSI machines only to discover in a conversation with tech support that it installed correctly (it shows with a ? in device manager)..curious but ok. I purchased Vuescan and am busy trying to learn the ropes. I've tried scanning with ICE and w/o and am elated. The scanner with the IR channel is such an improvement over the HP Photosmart. What I'm looking for is a primer on initial settings and a guide to workflow. Any suggestions are appreciated. Kurt Simpson Editor Dual Sport News
filmscanners: Re: MDSD2 which way up?
Michael Moore wrote: Re: Emulsion side up or down... it really doesn't matter as far as I can tell... all you have to do is flip the image in PShop or whatever program you're using. Well I can't tell much difference myself either, I've done traditional darkroom work with an enlarger, and I know that it usually doesn't make a difference, but I would have thought that with these electronic slide scanners having such fine tolerances and narrow depth of field, it might make a difference to focus straight onto the emulsion, or to focus onto the emulsion through the depth of the celluloid. I'd sooner focus straight onto the emulsion just to make sure. So does the scanning light come from the bottom or the top of the scanner? The slide carrier is nearer to the top of the casing, suggesting that the light comes from the bottom (where there is more room for it). In this case, it might be best to load the film emulsion side down, but this is the opposite to what Minolta say in the manual. Also significant that Minolta's advice renders the images wrong way round. I know I can flip them in PhotoShop, but it's odd that they'd be reversed in the first place, like a TLR camera. These days there's no obvious excuse for software having that kind of quirk. And although it seems not to matter which way up the emulsion is, Minolta make a point of recommending one way over the other. I think we'll have to ask Minolta. Rome wrote: What I'd really like to know now, is if the question that someone asked last week on the list has been aswered yet, about which way up the negs are supposed to go in the DSD2 film holder. The manual booklet says emulsion side up, the pdf manual is diffrently worded but even more emphatic about putting them in emulsion up - yet logic says it should be emulsion side down. Which is it? ___ Need advice on Rome? Ask ROMEBUDDY http://www.romebuddy.com ROMEBUDDY.COM - for expatriates, students, holidaymakers and anyone else who needs to know how to survive in Italy...
filmscanners: film scanner software
About software and film scanner I cant understand why people are discussion a software like VueScan so much in this group. .If you are trying to learn how to scan a picture from negative or slides the only good software in my opinions are Silverfast, ( and some thimes the shipping manufactories software to your scanner.) If you are looking after a good automatic calculating software try Binuscan. If I order a Porsche I take it with manual stick handling, not automatic and try to learn how I can get the best out of the car. It seems that loot of people are to lazy to learn the basic rolls of film scanning and think VueScan are something they can relay on. VueScan are (also in my opinion for beginners) but if you are concern to learn how to scan pictures try a "pro software" and see who much more you can get out from your negative or slides. Mikael Risedal Lund Sweden _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
- Original Message - From: "Gordon Tassi" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 7:06 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 To get to VueScan's ICE equivalent use any cleaning mode. To get to the ICE GEM equivalent go to the medium or high cleaning modes. Gordon Thanks for the tip. Is there any way to control the use of GEM separately from the scratch removal modes? Nikon Scan 3.0 offers the following choices: Digital ICE : off/ on (normal) / on (fine) Digital ROC : (values 0 10) Digital GEM : (values 0 4) Jeremy
filmscanners: Re: Coolscan IV; Nikon Scan 3
Please see my responses (in Bold if the formatting comes through) to the questions that shAf posed: Douglas writes ... ... Nikon Scan 3.0 has worked without the crashes that some have complained of. Nikon Scan works flawlessly on my system - my OS is Win 98SE. I think this says more for the maturity of the device drivers for this OS, than the Nikon programmers, although they certainly have been given plenty of time to mature too. Let's keep an eye on some of the particulars ... if someone else posts a problem, maybe we can figure out what's different between your computer and theirs. E.G., what type of hardware controls your scanner ... USB, firewire, SCSI? The Coolscan IV has a USB interface. So far the Coolscan IV has been very satisfying. Vuescan has not performed any better that Nikon Scan 3.0. Nikon Scan seems to scan color negatives better than Vuescan. Someone else has posted experiencing problems with focussing their new Nikon ... as if the sensor had a VERY shallow depth of focus, that is, VERY sensitive to film flatness. What has your experience been?? No problem with focus so far. I have been using fairly flat slides and negatives - BW and color. The analog gain in Nikon Scan is better that using Vuescan multi passes for dark slides. ... NS "analog gain" would be more analogous with Vuescan's manual control of "exposure". Thanks. I'll try the "exposure" in Vuescan. Also, let us know what color space profiles NS allow you to choose from ... which is primarly why I scan with VS ... for wide gamut options, "Adobe wide" is a terrible highbit editing space (altho it is well understood and there shouldn't be any problem in converting from there to another). But, it would be better if NS allowed for choosing the LS-40's own device space, a specific ICM file, or creating 'raw' RGB. Nikon Scan has a choice between several gamma 2.2 and gamma 1.8 colorspaces. 2.2 Spaces: sRGB Bruce RGB NTSC (1953) Adobe RGB (1968) CIE RGB Wide Gamut RGB Wide Gamut RGB (compensated) Scanner RGB 1.8 Spaces: Apple RGB Color Match RGB Apple RGB (compensated) I am using the sRGB colorspace and it seems to work well - although I am new to this. Nikon Scan 3 also has a factor default CMYK or custom profile option. A factory default or custom ICM profile can be set for the monitor. I have mine set for a Gateway VX700a ICM profile. shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: film scanner software
"Mikael Risedal" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: VueScan are (also in my opinion for beginners) but if you are concern to learn how to scan pictures try a "pro software" and see who much more you can get out from your negative or slides. That's a big assumption about how much money people have to throw around, isn't it? If I can get good results with Vuescan for US$40 why would I want to buy Silverfast just to "try" it?? Silverfast won't give me 10 bits per channel from my LS30. Yes, I know you can get a demo of Silverfast, but IMO it's a sufficiently complex piece of software that it's difficult to judge from the demo whether it would be worth buying. I'd imagine that most of the people with filmscanners who have Silverfast got it bundled with the scanner. At least in Australia, OEM bundles are nowhere near as generous as in the USA. I don't know what the comparison with Europe is like. Rob
Re: filmscanners: film scanner software
Michael, IMHO Vuescan is more the Porsche - it's settings are much more difficult to master. But, like the Porsche, once you do understand it, it will do exactly what you ask of it. We discuss it because we use it and it is complex, yet when set properly makes the workflow much smoother, faster and yet more accurate. Believe me when I say we do appreciate its shortcomings, and we also respect and use both Silverfast and the various manufacturers' software. Just my opinion. Maris - Original Message - From: "Mikael Risedal" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 10:47 PM Subject: filmscanners: film scanner software | About software and film scanner | I cant understand why people are discussion a software like VueScan so much | in this group. .If you are trying to learn how to scan a picture from | negative or slides the only good software in my opinions are Silverfast, | ( and some thimes the shipping manufactories software to your scanner.) If | you are looking after a good automatic calculating software try Binuscan. | If I order a Porsche I take it with manual stick handling, not automatic and | try to learn how I can get the best out of the car. It seems that loot of | people are to lazy to learn the basic rolls of film scanning and think | VueScan are something they can relay on. | VueScan are (also in my opinion for beginners) but if you are concern to | learn how to scan pictures try a "pro software" and see who much more | you can get out from your negative or slides. | Mikael Risedal | Lund | Sweden | | | _ | Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. |
Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000
No there is not, unfortunately, though we have asked Ed Hamrick the developer if he could/would do so. Maris - Original Message - From: "Jeremy Brookfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 6:00 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 | | - Original Message - | From: "Gordon Tassi" [EMAIL PROTECTED] | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 7:06 PM | Subject: Re: filmscanners: Review of the Nikon CoolScan 4000 | | | To get to VueScan's ICE equivalent use any cleaning mode. To get to the | ICE GEM | equivalent go to the medium or high cleaning modes. | | Gordon | | Thanks for the tip. Is there any way to control the use of GEM separately | from the scratch removal modes? | | Nikon Scan 3.0 offers the following choices: | | Digital ICE : off/ on (normal) / on (fine) | Digital ROC : (values 0 10) | Digital GEM : (values 0 4) | | Jeremy | |
Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...
I reserve judgement on that one! Previous Nikon bulk slide feeders have been notorious for jamming. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Scales) wrote: Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with the optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time. Tom You want the best possible quality. However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to increase production throughput. Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to you, so money is no object. So what do you buy? Jeremy Nicholl
RE: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...
Then you can spend your life running from seat to seat :-) Ah, but with all that money you would not have to; you could hire people with expertise to sit in those seats and do the work for you. :-) Actually, if you had all that money, I am sure that you would find better things and toys to play with than scanners and scanning. :-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Derek Clarke Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 8:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan... [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Nicholl) wrote: You want the best possible quality. However, time is also of the essence, so you are prepared to make minimal trade-offs in absolute quality in order to increase production throughput. Fortunately, that rich uncle you never liked just croaked, and in a final moment of senility, he's left his entire ill-gotten gains to you, so money is no object. So what do you buy? If money truly is unlimited, you find the best quality scanner possible irrespective of speed, then buy 10 of them along with the same number of dedicated computers for scanning stations. Then you can spend your life running from seat to seat :-)
Re: filmscanners: film scanner software
Mikael: As I stated in a previous post, some of us used Vuescan, some Silverfast, some Binuscan, some Canonscan, and so on and on. I am sure that each of us has a preference. Then there are those who use a certain software that they feel does a better job with negatives, so they use that for negatives and a different one for tranneys, and vice versa. Some want ICE some do not, and some even use Photoshop for all of it. The point is that as long as each of us understands the shot comings and strengths of their software and uses them appropriately, I am sure we will receive the type of images we desire, whether we are amateurs or pros at scanning. The great thing about this list is that it is informative about many aspects of scanning and even on some peripheral topics that may even be "off topic" to the list. If we do not want to read about Silverfast, Vuescan, Binuscan, or any other topic, the mouse or the delete key allow us move on to a topic that we want to read about. If we want to learn as much as we can from the group, we can read about things in other software or hardware packages and see if we want to try to apply them to our software or hardware. We may even decide to buy one and try it out. Whether we want to continue on in ignorant blissa nd continue to use our "amateur software" is really our business. Besides, we my feel we are getting better results from our package or maybe that we do not wish to buy another one. Please not let us get into another flame war like the one about the (dare I say it), the Mac and the PC. Gordon Mikael Risedal wrote: About software and film scanner I cant understand why people are discussion a software like VueScan so much in this group. .If you are trying to learn how to scan a picture from negative or slides the only good software in my opinions are Silverfast, ( and some thimes the shipping manufactories software to your scanner.) If you are looking after a good automatic calculating software try Binuscan. If I order a Porsche I take it with manual stick handling, not automatic and try to learn how I can get the best out of the car. It seems that loot of people are to lazy to learn the basic rolls of film scanning and think VueScan are something they can relay on. VueScan are (also in my opinion for beginners) but if you are concern to learn how to scan pictures try a "pro software" and see who much more you can get out from your negative or slides. Mikael Risedal Lund Sweden _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Re: filmscanners: film scanner software
Friends, it is my convintion ... this guy is Dicky Corbett ! ... A Swedish would NEVER take such a set of statements (IMHO). Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site - Original Message - From: "Dale Gail" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 3:16 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: film scanner software Mikael , Mikael, Mikael :)) You jest. Dale Kaechler Canada - Original Message - From: "Mikael Risedal" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 10:47 PM Subject: filmscanners: film scanner software About software and film scanner I cant understand why people are discussion a software like VueScan so much in this group. .If you are trying to learn how to scan a picture from negative or slides the only good software in my opinions are Silverfast, ( and some thimes the shipping manufactories software to your scanner.) If you are looking after a good automatic calculating software try Binuscan. If I order a Porsche I take it with manual stick handling, not automatic and try to learn how I can get the best out of the car. It seems that loot of people are to lazy to learn the basic rolls of film scanning and think VueScan are something they can relay on. VueScan are (also in my opinion for beginners) but if you are concern to learn how to scan pictures try a "pro software" and see who much more you can get out from your negative or slides. Mikael Risedal Lund Sweden
