Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
Edwin wrote >Oh I assure you that it does work, and the improvements in the > interface are well worth the trouble to install it. You only must un-install > 2.5.1 before you install it. Perhaps you should check out the manual for it > before you give it a try, a 2.68 MB pdf. Thanks Edwin, I'll do just that... Peter Marquis-Kyle
Re: filmscanners: OT - Virus Alert
on 4/18/01 10:54 PM, Mark Thomas at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I act as a system admin for a couple of sites, and I find that the virus > *warnings* are MUCH more of a problem than the actual viruses. So far I > have had 6 warnings today about this one. Sig...! no kidding. . I think virus 'warnings' can be considered a virus. especially for those of us on macs! you know the mac version of an outlook virus? it's a regular email that contains the line "please forward this message to all your friends". -- Johnny Deadman http://www.pinkheadedbug.com
Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
Edwin, Do you know if NikonScan 3.0 supports hi-bit export with the LS-30? Dave - Original Message - From: Edwin Eleazer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 7:41 PM Subject: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000 Anyone else using 3.0 with the LS-30 or LS-2000? I've just started trying it, but the results are pretty good. Here's the link. http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107d.htm
Re: filmscanners: OT - Virus Alert
(At the risk of being labelled a Dicky..! :) While I appreciate the thought behind these virus warnings (and it is actually nice to see one that isn't a hoax!), may I suggest that this isn't really the correct forum? Particularly when this virus requires you to doubleclick on an attachment from an unknown source - I think if you are that silly you deserve to get infected! I act as a system admin for a couple of sites, and I find that the virus *warnings* are MUCH more of a problem than the actual viruses. So far I have had 6 warnings today about this one. Sig...! Permit me to quote from the standard response I send out whenever I get these warnings.. These warning messages are a form of virus, too! Why? - well, they spread and multiply, slow down the internet, block up mail servers, scare people (often needlessly) etc.. So, how can you guarantee safety? 1. Use a reputable virus checker, and keep it updated 2. Keep your operating system and browser updated (eg Microsoft's Update site posts security fixes from time to time) 3. Never run email attachments unless you are certain that they are from a safe source. It's that simple. No further warnings required. :) Mark T. At 06:24 PM 18/04/01 -0400, you wrote: >- Original Message - >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 3:40 PM >Subject: NORMAN CUSTOMERS - Norman Customer Alert >
Fw: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
> I almost always use Vuescan, in preference to NS 2.5.1, but the few scans I > did with NS 3.0 came out beautiful, both trans and negatives, so another > comparison might be in order, but NS 3.0 has a wealth of new features and > looking at the manual download would explain much more than I could here. It > also states that "users of Nikonscan 2.X will have increased functionality > under 3.0". > I've only done a few scans with it, but the colors are very nicely balanced > with 3.0, better in my opinion than with 2.5.1. A certain lake and dam slide > that 2.5.1 never really got right between the sky, the concrete dam, and the > deep blue water, looks great with 3.0. But, as I mostly shoot print film, > I've nevered mastered slides on the LS-30 with Vuescan. As far as negatives, > Vuescan gives great results after working with it in Photoshop 6, sometimes > the scans appearing somewhat dull colorwise before any adjustments, the NS > 3.0 negative colors were very nice, requiring less adjustment. Whether they > are better after Photoshop work, will have to wait till I get some more time > (picking up some developed negatives tomorrow). > - Original Message - > From: "Hersch Nitikman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:27 PM > Subject: Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000 > > > > Edwin, have you used both NS 2.5 and recet versions of Vuescan? When you > > say the results with NS 3.0 are pretty good, in what ways do you believe > it > > to be superior? I would very much appreciate your opinions on that. I > > assume you are using an LS-30... That is what I have. > > Hersch > > > >
RE: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
>Anyone else using 3.0 with the LS-30 or LS-2000? I'll have to try it and see if it kills the jaggies. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
Oh I assure you that it does work, and the improvements in the interface are well worth the trouble to install it. You only must un-install 2.5.1 before you install it. Perhaps you should check out the manual for it before you give it a try, a 2.68 MB pdf. I have gotten great colors on both slides and negatives using it, and the options are much improved. However, GEM and ROC are "grayed" out under the tools palette. Nikon says that the drivers for the LS-30 and LS-2000 are as now unsupported and are "beta" drivers, and advises to wait for the next release, I will wait for the next release, but I'll use 3.0 untill they come out with the next one! Absolutely no problems at all. Edwin - Original Message - From: "Peter Marquis-Kyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:11 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000 > Edwin > > Thanks for the link. But the Euro Nikon website implies that NikonScan > 3.0 is only for the LS-40 and LS-4000. It still offers NikonScan 2.5.1 > for the LS-30 and LS-2000. > > I'm using 2.5.1 with my LS-30. I'll wait for reports that 3.0 does > work with the older scanners, and provides some tangible improvements, > before I install 3.0. > > Cheers > > Peter Marquis-Kyle > Here's the link. > > http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107d.htm > > >
Re: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
Edwin Thanks for the link. But the Euro Nikon website implies that NikonScan 3.0 is only for the LS-40 and LS-4000. It still offers NikonScan 2.5.1 for the LS-30 and LS-2000. I'm using 2.5.1 with my LS-30. I'll wait for reports that 3.0 does work with the older scanners, and provides some tangible improvements, before I install 3.0. Cheers Peter Marquis-Kyle - Original Message - From: "Edwin Eleazer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 9:41 AM Subject: filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000 Anyone else using 3.0 with the LS-30 or LS-2000? I've just started trying it, but the results are pretty good. Here's the link. http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107d.htm
filmscanners: NikonScan 3.0 with LS-30 & Ls-2000
Anyone else using 3.0 with the LS-30 or LS-2000? I've just started trying it, but the results are pretty good. Here's the link. http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107d.htm
filmscanners: Virus Alert
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 3:40 PM Subject: NORMAN CUSTOMERS - Norman Customer Alert > > > NORMAN CUSTOMER ALERT > > Date: April 18, 2001 > > A new mass-mailing email worm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] has been reported in the > wild. > > If you have a Microsoft Outlook address book, the matcher virus will send itself > to your email addresses when activated. > > Its message looks like this: > > Subject: Matcher > Body: Want to find your love mates!!! Try this its cool -- > Looks and Attitude Matching to opposite sex. > > Attachment:matcher.exe > > When executed, the matcher will install itself in your registry, so it will run > every time you start-up your computer. If you are infected with this worm, the > message, "from: Bugger" will appear on your screen during start-up and wait for > you to press a key. > > We have posted the new definition file to identify and clean this virus on our > web site at www.norman.com, under the definition file for W32/Matcher. > > And please visit http://www.norman.com/virus_info/w32_matcher.shtml for more > details on this virus. > > Thank you for using Norman Virus Control! Why not the best! > > Norman Data Defense Systems, Inc. > 9302 Lee Highway, Suite 950A > Fairfax, VA 22031 > (888) GO-NORMAN > >
Re: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems
Hi! My experience is with the Scan Multi. My experience is that the Minolta software gives more options, which may however not always be very obvious. Vuescan is normally calibrated using a Q60 slide, but there are no utilities for individual calibration by user. It has setting for a lot of negativ films. The results from the Vuescan software have better color at default setting than what the Minolta software gives at default settings. It also works with Linux, which is the operating system I normally use. Ed Hamrick, who is the developer of Vuescan makes new version about once a week, and is very open to suggestions. Regards Erik Kaffehr On Wednesday 18 April 2001 18:23, you wrote: > Hi > > "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" scanner has USB interface. > Yes I can look for event log. > > Let me try Vuescan too; > How does Vuesacn's scans compare with the ones taken from Minolta supplied > softwares. > > I have written a mail to Minolta. > Minolta is so bad, none of the document that came with scanner have > telephone number of customer support. > > Thanks to all for responding. > > Bye > Ramesh > > -Original Message- > From: Erik Kaffehr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 3:30 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems > > > Hi! > > I use Vuescan (www.hamrick.com/vsm.html) with my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi, > I > recommended it to a friend who has a Scan Dual II, and he was very > satisfied.You may as well try Vuescan. Ed Hamrick, the author of Vuescan, > is > very helpful. > > Regards > > Erik > > n Tuesday 17 April 2001 23:00, you wrote: > > I too doubted the same and yestarday I installed the driver software > > which is displayed > > in the www.minoltausa.com. This did not solve anything. > > It seems problem is due to software because it scanner reboots the PC. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Laurie Solomon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 10:44 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems > > > > > > Just a guess; but have you checked with Minolta to make sure that you > > have the most recent Win2K compatible driver. I would chek the Minolta > > web site. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ramesh Kumar_C > > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:41 AM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems > > > > > > Hi > > My 2-weeks old Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II has following problem. > > > > "HOLDER NOT SET PROPERLY ERROR = 36" message box comes. > > After getting this error anything of the following may happen > > a) When I switch off the scanner, my PC gets rebooted. > > b) Normally I will not be able scan but if I am able to scan, scans will > > be > > > completely GREEN or MEGANTA > > > > To get over this error I need to reinstall the minolta software. > > But after scanning another 6 films again I will get same error. > > > > Environment: I am running Win 2k & Minolta "Easy Scan Utility" > > > > > > Any help will be welcome. > > > > Thanks > > Ramesh -- Erik Kaffehr[EMAIL PROTECTED] alt. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mariebergsvägen 53 +46 155 219338 (home) S-611 66 Nyköping +46 155 263515 (office) Sweden -- Message sent using 100% recycled electrons --
Re: filmscanners: Scanner consideration
Hi James Never used the 1640, but I noticed the UK computer magazine liked it whilst having a free browse at Smiths. It was up against some proper film scanners as well as flatbeds. I didn't read it properly and I am not always too impressed with their reviews. They may even have preferred it due to it's versatility and price. £300 is a hell of a lot cheaper than a proper medium format film scanner. How big do you want to print ? I can get a very good A4 and a more than acceptable A3 (to most people) from my 3Mp digital camera. I still decided to go for the 4000dpi film scanner to scrape as much detail as possible from the slide, but I still think 1600x3200 off medium format will produce impressive results at A3. Steve - Original Message - From: "James L. Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:30 PM Subject: filmscanners: Scanner consideration > I have returned my Epson Perfection 1200U Photo scanner and will > be buying a new scanner. I know that a film scanner is the way to > go for scanning negatives and transparencies but I also need a > flatbed scanner. Since most of my transparencies and negatives I > scan are medium format and larger (up to 4 X 5), I can not justify > a film scanner at this time. I am considering the Epson 1640 for > the flatbed and hope that it will give better results than the > 1200. They're specs tout a 3.3 D-Max and 42 bit, a little better > than the 3.0 D-Max and 36 bit that was stated for the 1200. I'm > wondering if anyone on this mail list has experience with the 1640 > and would recommend it. I'd really like to see the new Polaroid > 120 but I'm afraid it may be above my budget limits for now. If > the 1640 will provide anything near the results I'm looking for > that's the route I'd like to pursue. The 1200 was bad to > posterize in the greens and flesh tones with the slightest under > exposed transparency or over exposed negative. Any advice or > recommendations would be appreciated. > > Jim Sims > >
Re: filmscanners: Scanning large format without a bank loan
I live in Salt Lake City, which has fairly sizeable contingent of extremely picky photogs... especially the large format landscape shooters... My local pro shop, Pictureline, which takes on the air of catering to the trade, has started to push the Epson 1640, which it seems a fair number of their picky clients are snapping up like hotcakes.. I will probably be the next one to buy (I am still trying to decide if I should spend the $1200 on a Linocolor flatbed so I can get 4 4x5 negs on one scan) Pictureline has an 8x10 print of a Utah rock canyon, with lots of exquisite shades of red and blue casts, etc... it was scanned from the Epson... These guys usually don't recommend anything they would not use themselves...just a FYI FWIW... Mike M. Jim Yount wrote: > Some time ago, at the request of several on this list, I published some VERY > informal tests of the Epson Perfection 1640 at http://www.lauby.com/scanner > > The images include one photo (church picture) that Jerry was kind enough to > print Piezo, with results that amazed us both. Since most of my images are > 6x7, the flatbed will work for me, at least until more complete tests are in > on the Nikon and Polaroid medium format film scanners. > > I haven't tried Ed's software on this machine yet (work is interfering with > my photo passions!) but plan to do so, since I haven't been able to get good > results with black and white. > > Hope this helps. > > Jim
RE: filmscanners: Scanning large format without a bank loan
I have had very good results from vuescan on the 1640 in B&W (and also colour tranny) - scanning 4x5 Tim A > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Yount > Sent: April 18, 2001 7:41 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Scanning large format without a bank loan > > > Some time ago, at the request of several on this list, I > published some VERY > informal tests of the Epson Perfection 1640 at > http://www.lauby.com/scanner > > The images include one photo (church picture) that Jerry was kind > enough to > print Piezo, with results that amazed us both. Since most of my > images are > 6x7, the flatbed will work for me, at least until more complete > tests are in > on the Nikon and Polaroid medium format film scanners. > > I haven't tried Ed's software on this machine yet (work is > interfering with > my photo passions!) but plan to do so, since I haven't been able > to get good > results with black and white. > > Hope this helps. > > Jim > >
RE: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems
Hi "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" scanner has USB interface. Yes I can look for event log. Let me try Vuescan too; How does Vuesacn's scans compare with the ones taken from Minolta supplied softwares. I have written a mail to Minolta. Minolta is so bad, none of the document that came with scanner have telephone number of customer support. Thanks to all for responding. Bye Ramesh -Original Message- From: Erik Kaffehr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 3:30 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems Hi! I use Vuescan (www.hamrick.com/vsm.html) with my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi, I recommended it to a friend who has a Scan Dual II, and he was very satisfied.You may as well try Vuescan. Ed Hamrick, the author of Vuescan, is very helpful. Regards Erik n Tuesday 17 April 2001 23:00, you wrote: > I too doubted the same and yestarday I installed the driver software which > is displayed > in the www.minoltausa.com. This did not solve anything. > It seems problem is due to software because it scanner reboots the PC. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Laurie Solomon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 10:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems > > > Just a guess; but have you checked with Minolta to make sure that you have > the most recent Win2K compatible driver. I would chek the Minolta web > site. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ramesh Kumar_C > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:41 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: filmscanners: "Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II" Problems > > > Hi > My 2-weeks old Minolta Dimage Scan Dula II has following problem. > > "HOLDER NOT SET PROPERLY ERROR = 36" message box comes. > After getting this error anything of the following may happen > a) When I switch off the scanner, my PC gets rebooted. > b) Normally I will not be able scan but if I am able to scan, scans will be > completely GREEN or MEGANTA > > To get over this error I need to reinstall the minolta software. > But after scanning another 6 films again I will get same error. > > Environment: I am running Win 2k & Minolta "Easy Scan Utility" > > > Any help will be welcome. > > Thanks > Ramesh -- Erik Kaffehr[EMAIL PROTECTED] alt. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mariebergsvägen 53 +46 155 219338 (home) S-611 66 Nyköping +46 155 263515 (office) Sweden -- Message sent using 100% recycled electrons --
RE: filmscanners: Scanning large format without a bank loan
Some time ago, at the request of several on this list, I published some VERY informal tests of the Epson Perfection 1640 at http://www.lauby.com/scanner The images include one photo (church picture) that Jerry was kind enough to print Piezo, with results that amazed us both. Since most of my images are 6x7, the flatbed will work for me, at least until more complete tests are in on the Nikon and Polaroid medium format film scanners. I haven't tried Ed's software on this machine yet (work is interfering with my photo passions!) but plan to do so, since I haven't been able to get good results with black and white. Hope this helps. Jim
RE: filmscanners: Grain-Aliasing on Slides
Rob wrote: >Lynn, what scanner are you using? An Acer I think? Right on. I don't think it was the scanner's fault, this time, although Scanwit's density-range leave lots of room for improvement. :-) It was definitely the camera (and the operator)--I'd have done better to meter the grass, with the bright background out of sight. But it was a new camera (then). What puzzles me most was the "woven effect" which only affected the blue sky (which was "perfectly exposed"), and not the rest of the tranny. Best regards--LRA Lynn wrote: > so in reflective color. Result: another poorly-exposed slide that looks > fine on a projection screen, not-so-great on a 2700ppi scan. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
filmscanners: Scanning large format without a bank loan
First off, let me explain that the reason I haven't been very active on the list the last week is twofold, 1) my ISP has somehow corrupted my mailbox again, and I have to go through a painful process to read my mail, and torture to actually reply to it. 2) If that weren't painful enough I'm playing accountant for my wife and my own tax filings, which in Canada are due the end of the month, or (so I've heard) they add one digit for each day you are late, or is it they cut off one digit off your body for each day you are late-- something like that... ;-) Jim Sims wrote: >I have returned my Epson Perfection 1200U Photo scanner and will be buying a new scanner. I know that a film scanner is the way to go for scanning negatives and transparencies but I also need a flatbed scanner. Since most of my transparencies and negatives I scan are medium format and larger (up to 4 X 5), I can not justify a film scanner at this time. I am considering the Epson 1640 for the flatbed and hope that it will give better results than the 1200. They're specs tout a 3.3 D-Max and 42 bit, a little better than the 3.0 D-Max and 36 bit that was stated for the 1200. I'm wondering if anyone on this mail list has experience with the 1640 and would recommend it. I'd really like to see the new Polaroid 120 but I'm afraid it may be above my budget limits for now. If the 1640 will provide anything near the results I'm looking for that's the route I'd like to pursue. The 1200 was bad to posterize in the greens and flesh tones with the slightest under exposed transparency or over exposed negative. Any advice or recommendations would be appreciated. = Now, I don't know what kind of budget the writer has to work with. I'll agree that overall film scanners do the best job for 4x5, or any other format, overall, but as Jerry will tell you, the Agfa 2500 (which will still set you back about $4300 US) will do some nice transmissive scans. There are a few middle priced flatbed scanners which can do moderate to reasonable scans of 4x5" or smaller scans. Certainly, most flatbeds fall down on 35mm, but some of the newer 1200 dpi optical flatbed scanner aren't bad. Most flatbed scanners have a sweet spot down the center where they provide the best resolution. Some are designed to take advantage of this sweet spot for transparency use. ON the low end, reports from the Agfa Snapscan e50 have been good. The scanner with built in transparency adapter costs under $200 US. It has a native 1200 x 2400 dpi resolution, 42 bit A/D, with 8 bit per color output. However, I do not believe a full 4 x 5" transparency section. In fact, I think it is about 2 x 3". UMAX makes the 4000U which is also a 1200 x 2400 dpi scanner, and has an optional transparency top, which I believe goes up to 4 x 5. It is a 36 bit system and is about $300 US plus the cost of the transparency adapter. Microtek has several scanners. The Scanmaker 4 is about $500 and has a built in transparency hood which can scan up to 8 x 10" but is only 600 x 1200 dpi, 36 bit claiming 3.4 Dmax, if you take those claims to be meaningful. The UMAX Powerlook III at $800 US is 1200 x 2400 with 8 x 10 transparency included, max density 3.4D. There are several flatbeds in the $1200 US range which also have these features. All of these scanners will be a compromise of some sort to get the quality a 2400-4000 dpi film scanner will provide, but your budget may determine the range of scanner to consider. In terms of D max numbers, keep in mind that the difference between a 3.0 and a 3.4 is quite substantial, however, all manufacturers play games with these numbers, so only tests will reveal what will work. You might wish to see if any magazines have recently reviewed the transmissive scanning abilities of medium priced flatbed scanners and see how they were rated. PS: To Lynn, no I have no method to get a HP Photosmart to scan 4 x 5" transparencies at present. Art
