Re: filmscanners: Nikon 4000 ED Review Part III
Jules writes ... - Original Message - From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] ... What's the deal with ICE^3 support for the new Nikon scanners only?? If Nikon offers NS3 for the LS-2000, why not offer the full deal??? i'd love to get ICE^3 for my LS-2000. it's typical for companies to try and force current owners to upgrade their hardware through this sort of methods. i wouldn't be surprised if someone doesn't hack a way to use ICE^3, since it's all just software anyway. I can imagine this tactic as well ... but they'd make more $$ and more people happy if they charged us for the NS3 upgrade ... but without more freedom with regard to scanning into more appropriate color space, I may just stay with Vuescan. my US$0.02 ... shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Subject: 4000 ED and updating IEEE 1394 driver in 98 SE
Well,I managed to set it up and install everything finally,and have just spent a few hours getting to know it,and i have to say i am very impressed with the scans it produces.I think you may well be right,and i might not need the glass holder Gordon,but i will probably try it out anyway just to see for myself if there is any difference:) I will have to experiment some more with it,but so far, at least the central portions of the images look as good to me as Kodak photo CD scans,which is all i can compare them to due to my limited scanner experience. Seeing these first few scans has really enthused me,and i have no doubt that buying this scanner was the right choice ! Thanks again to all for your help and advice. Leo At 23:15 19/04/01 -0400, you wrote: Leo: Since you just received the scanned, I suggest you try to scan soome slides with differing depths for the bow, from flat to really curved. If you scan them and judge the sharpness of each, you may find that you will not need the glass slide holders with the new scanner. Gordon Leo Stachowicz wrote: Also,one other question The only optional glass holder which i can find which is available for the 4000 ED is the FH-G1 Medical Slide Holder is this the right accessory to get if i want maximum film flatness when scanning 35mm transparencies and negatives ? Thanks Leo
Re: filmscanners: Acer Scanwit 2720s vs 2740s vs HP s20
At 04:44 PM 20/04/01 +0200, you wrote: am new to the filmscanner world.. We all are or were! :) I'm considering either the Acer Scanwit 2720s or the 2740s. My perception after reading the specs, is that the 2740s is 2720s+ICE. Did I miss anything? As Art has pointed out, the 2740 also uses a 14-bit A/D converter instead of a 12-bit. Without going into details (that I don't really understand anyway!), that may mean a slight increase in colour quality and/or contrast range.. Would like opinions/experiences of whether the ICE was worth the price. Otherwise, for the 2720s, how much effort did you take to touch up any negative defects (assuming minor blemishes). I have the 2720, and would spend 1-3 minutes touching up an 'average' image for 'average' quality :), for example if I wanted a good 6"x4" print or large on-screen display with no visible defects. If I am after 'high' quality (eg a razor sharp 11"x8" print), and it's very dusty or scratched, it could take 30 minutes or more - but that is rare. When I first started it could take a lot longer, but I think I have the hang of it now..! I often spend longer tweaking color/contrast than on dust removal.. ICE slows the 2740 down, as it has to do another pass over the film. I don't miss it, but if you have a lot of old dusty/damaged images it may be a worthwhile investment. The other unit I'm considering is HP's s20, but on features, stacks up with the 2720, and is much more expensive here. I think the s20 has slightly lower resolution, ie 2400 v. 2720, but my knowledge is rusty. I'm pretty sure there is a review of the HP on Tony's page (www.halftone.co.uk). I am very impressed with the Acer given it's price, and I think Art may be correct in saying that the s20 is a bit past its prime, particularly if you are planning to print at 7"x5" or more.. Regards, MT.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 4000 ED Review Part III
From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] What's the deal with ICE^3 support for the new Nikon scanners only?? If Nikon offers NS3 for the LS-2000, why not offer the full deal??? shAf :o) One would think that Nikon would at least offer ICE^3 as an upgrade for a fee for the LS 2000 and LS 30 owners. Dale
filmscanners: Nikonscan 3.0
Well, I've tried it and the jaggies haven't gone away. I'll have to experiment some more with grainy or damaged pics to see if the improvements in ICE etc make any difference on the LS30. Example attached which demonstrates the jaggies - look at the flash reflection in the sugar glider's eye. Rob PS Can anyone explain to me how to set the scan resolution to 2700dpi? It seems determined to stay at 1350.
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan 3.0
I tried it also with my LS2000. I found the jaggies even worse, or at least harder to get rid ofcompare to V2.5.1. With V-2.5.1 if I use Clearimage, even with sharpening, the jaggies are reduced. If I use 4x mutli-scan, I don't have a problem. With V-3.0 I had jaggies even with the ClearImage on and also with 2x and 4x multi-sampling. I have since removed V-3 and put V-2.5.1 back on. I had work I had to do and couldn't test it any further If I get a chance in the next I'll try to get time to put in on my test machine and do further testing. Dave Nelson At 10:09 PM 4/21/2001 +1000, you wrote: Well, I've tried it and the jaggies haven't gone away. I'll have to experiment some more with grainy or damaged pics to see if the improvements in ICE etc make any difference on the LS30. Example attached which demonstrates the jaggies - look at the flash reflection in the sugar glider's eye. Rob PS Can anyone explain to me how to set the scan resolution to 2700dpi? It seems determined to stay at 1350. Attachment Converted: "d:\internet\mail\djnelso@h\attach\sugar_glider_eye.jpg"
filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
http://www.myalbum.ne.jp/cgi-bin/a_menu?id=fa215650 A Japanese photographer have done some tests with the new Nikon D1X camera and have also some pictures scanned by Nikon LS 4000 at 4000 ppi Look at pictures DSC_1126.jpg (D1X) and same picture LS4000.jpg. Here you can see that the ED 4000 picture are sharper in the middle and not so sharp out against the corner and sides of the picture. Look at the sky and the grain in the film. Look at the house building to the right of the picture. This is a example of curved film and bad film holder. I took the D1X picture and interpol. 100% in Photoshop The picture size are now almost the same as LS4000 and 4000ppi I compare the two pictures and please do the same! I gave the pictures unsharp mask 100. 1. 1. Conclusion; ED 4000 scanner resolution are not better then the Nikon D1X out at the sides and corner of the test pictures. (I think the camera have more resolution in some struktures) The scanner have better resolution in the middle compare to D1X . Mikael Risedal Lund Sweden -- _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
Mikael writes ... ... Conclusion; ED 4000 scanner resolution are not better then the Nikon D1X out at the sides and corner of the test pictures. (I think the camera have more resolution in some struktures) ... I have always been impressed with the D1, but never able to overcome the discomfort for paying so much money for a camera which would be worth only half as much a year later. Nikon provides absolutely no upgrade path for the D1 ... for example, upgradeable CCD resolution. Sorry for going off-topic ... but for the money, the Horseman "Digiflex" http://horsemanusa.com/toppage.html offers Nikon MF users the best digital upgrade path (... although still very spendy ...), and will use the lenses we all have invested in. shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
Here you can see that the ED 4000 picture are sharper in the middle and not so sharp Hmm.. anyone know how similiar the optics are in the 8000ED? Perhaps it has a greater depth of field (hoping)? Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=113369 http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=115567
Re: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
In what I downloaded from the Japanese site, the comparisons were apples to oranges to my eye. The full frame LS-4000 shot did not download fully or properly. But from what I downloaded and saw, the magnification was much larger than the D1x shot. From what I saw, the grain on the edges was pretty sharp with the LS-4000 shot. The lack of image sharpness may be due to a camera lens that is not sharp edge to edge. Not being able to read Japanese, I could not discern the author's scientific method. There are a lot of variables with this kind of testing that need to be neutralized as much as possible. I have had no experience with any lack of edge to edge sharpness on my LS-40. I believe the optics are very similar to the LS-4000. - Original Message - From: "Ryan K. Brooks" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2001 12:09 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000 Here you can see that the ED 4000 picture are sharper in the middle and not so sharp Hmm.. anyone know how similiar the optics are in the 8000ED? Perhaps it has a greater depth of field (hoping)? Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=113369 http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=115567
re: filmscanners: Acer Scanwit 2720s vs 2740s vs HP s20
Lawrence: There are quite a few scanwit owners on the filmscanners list, but general opinion questions I've noticed don't turn up a whole bunch of answers. Personally I am getting quite qwick at fixing dust and scratches on my slides and negatives in Photoshop. If you do not have photoshop, I would put it VERY high on the list. The reason being the manipulation after the scan will take many times longer than the scan itself. When I started I could not get good scans on some of the negs and slides, but now that I have nearly a year under my belt and hundreds of hours in Photoshop, I would consider myself quite proficient for a hobby. I can dust spot and neg or slide in about 5 minutes or less. Therefore I put the personaly worth of ICE at about $100.00. In my opinion, whatever film scanner you buy, VUESCAN is a must from www.hamrick.com. And especially on the ScanWit as Mira Photo is weak. Grain aliasing is a problem with all the 2700 dpi scanners, the 2900 _might_ be a little better. 4000 dpi don't seem to suffer much. This is the single biggest issue with the Scanwit, the optics are very sharp. Alan am new to the filmscanner world, so please bear with the newbie questions. I'm considering either the Acer Scanwit 2720s or the 2740s. My perception after reading the specs, is that the 2740s is 2720s+ICE. Did I miss anything? Would like opinions/experiences of whether the ICE was worth the price. Otherwise, for the 2720s, how much effort did you take to touch up any negative defects (assuming minor blemishes). If you have a 2720s, would you (on hindsight) have bought the 2740s? The other unit I'm considering is HP's s20, but on features, stacks up with the 2720, and is much more expensive here. Thanks Lawrence
filmscanners: Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED Review
Here is a link to the Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 ED review: http://imaging-resource.com/PRODS/LS4K/L40A.HTM So far I think this is the only 4000dpi scanner they have reviewed. Ron
RE: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
No one seems to be commenting on the huge difference between these two images. Film does have a lot of resolution, but it also has a lot of grain. There is a smoothness and evenness of tone to the D1X that film doesn't come close to. I'd love to see two prints from these two images, printed at the same magnification and print size, about 11x14. That's large enough to be pushing the resolution of the D1X, and pushing the graininess of the scanned image. Which would look better, I wonder?
RE: filmscanners: Nikon D1x and LS4000
larger than the D1x shot. From what I saw, the grain on the edges was pretty sharp with the LS-4000 shot. I noticed quite a bit of chromatic problems out at the edge, esp. at the upper right white building (had to be from the lens).Also, the typical overruns at the edge of the mount, that somehow vuescan seems to fix, might be contributing to the grain changing at the edges (just a guess). Ryan K. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=113369 http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=115567
