filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright (off-topic)
Roger wrote: If the Copyright Office will accept CDs, many of us on this list would find if of great benefit since we already scan many of our photos and writing a CD is easier and cheaper than making contact sheets to send as a deposit. If their guidelines say anything about file formats and resolutions, that would be good too. I wouldn't want to have to send copies of all the full resolution scans I've done. Small (640x480 say) jpegs would be ideal because you could fit *stacks* on a single disk. I'll have to find out if there's any sort of registration of images in Australia. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
RE: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:46:58 -0600 Stan McQueen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm concerned that the effect of your argument will be to convince people that it is not worthwhile to go to the effort of registering their images. For the avoidance of doubt : in most countries except the US, there is no concept of copyright registration. The fact of authorship is all that is required. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
yeah but you guys miss the point I don't think we miss the point, but rather we have different priorities. I would love it if VueScan had a better (and more Mac like) interface, but given the choice between improving the guts of VueScan or the interface, I will take the guts anytime. Especially since I can work around the portions of the interface I don't like. If the raw scan is bad there is no work around. Ed could hire 5 programmers to assist him, spend 6 months getting them up to speed before getting anything useful out of them, and raise the price of VueScan from $40 to $400, but I think it would kill VueScan. I will soon have a brand new computer and am looking into new scanners, both 35 mm film and flatbed. I would much rather Ed support my next scanners with an adequate interface than not support my scanners with the worlds best interface. I will be very interested to hear when VueScan will support FireWire scanners running under MacOS X.
RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder
Ron, Call the 800 technical support number and request the brush for the SS4000. There is a sensor internal to the scanner that can collect dust preventing the scanner from finding it's home position. This brush attached to the front of the carrier. After powering down the scanner you manually pass the carrier back and forth to clean any dust off the sensor. I do not think it is to late to purchase a service contract. I will have a service representative email you directly with details. Regards David -Original Message- From: Ron Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder David, what free brush and how do I order it? I hadn't heard of an extended warranty. My SS4000 is 15 months old, I suppose it's too late for me to get one now --- not that I need it at the moment. Regards, Ron - Original Message - From: Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:07 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder Preben, I guess I am happy to hear from you :). The bulk feeder is going to be available to the best of my knowledge. Good things don't come quickly :). Each market sets it's own sales and marketing strategies. I was not aware specifically the Europe did not offer an extended warrantee on the scanners. I do know it is not available on film recorders supposedly because Europeans do not purchase them, a cultural issue I am told. I will pass on your comments to my corporate brothers in Europe. Glad you are pleased with your SS4000. be sure to order the free brush to clean the sensor. Regards, David -Original Message- From: Preben Kristensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder This is for David: The extended warranty offer seems to be valid only in the US - now, why is that? Are you planning to cut your sales to only US as well? Or are you selling inferior (Monday/Friday production) units outside US - so it is not worth doing? :-) Please pass this one on to the gods! We are now rapidly approaching the first year anniversary for the impending arrival of the bulk slide feeder. How should we celebrate that? :-) Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the performance? :-) Well, apart from that, I have been extremely happy with the SS4000 which, for a long time was the only suitable machine on the market for my needs! And I have not (touch wood)had any reason to test the repair service in Italy. Greetings from Preben
re: filmscanners: Vuescan blue anomaly
Alan wrote: I find with my scanwit all my scans with people in them, or actually all my scans lately have way too much blue in the[m] period. Alan, do you find this true after you aply Auto Levels in PS? That's the first thing I do after a scan is loaded, whether from Vuescan or MiraPhoto (Mira *really* needs it), before proceding with corrections. I find this action often puts whatever color(s) might dominate back into proper ralationship. If Auto Levels doesn't help, or makes it worse, I undo the action, then procede. Best regards--LRA From: Alan Womack [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Majordomo leben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: re: filmscanners: Vuescan blue anomaly Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:40:45 -0700 I noticed this with blue in shadows on 400 superia many versions ago, I will have to dig out the negs and see if the later versions have fixed it. I find with my scanwit all my scans with people in them, or actually all my scans lately have way too much blue in the period. I'm compensating with manually adjusting the white point blue setting to an additional .05 above what's there. Makes my scans way closer to what I adjust them too in PS. alan I too have had a problem that looks just like this. I have seen the 'blue highlights' phenomenon occur using Kodak Supra 400 100 negatives Epson Inkjet Printer FAQ: http://welcome.to/epson-inkjet _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: filmscanners: Semi OT: 16-bits [was Which Buggy Software?]
Still, all this is academic and makes assumptions about the 'purity' of 16bit data which may be incorrect in practice. Like Margulis, I'd agree that empirical evidence matters more than theory. I know I have managed to produce posterised sky areas in 16 bit, even with modest manipulations. Whether better or worse than if I'd used 8 bit I cannot say without returning to the image and trying both. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons In my experiments I have found that a gamma correction of 1.5, say, in Nikon Scan produces no posterisation whilst the same operation in Photoshop produces fairly severe posterisation. Both in 16-bit. Makes me feel nervous about PS. I notice, these days, that I can get PS to posterise relatively easily - and no, I'm not talking about curves that have horizontal or vertical sections or curves that double-back on themselves. Hmm. It's interesting to ponder whether grain/aliasing helps to hide errors or makes them show-up more. There is, maybe, an argument in favour of dithering the image (adding noise - preferably shaped in the frequency domain - a bit like dither in digital audio systems) before manipulation, if one's first attempt showed heavy posterisation, in a bid to perform the same manipulation with less posterisation. Jawed
re: filmscanners: Vuescan blue anomaly
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 15:40:45 -0700 Alan Womack ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have seen the 'blue highlights' phenomenon occur using Kodak Supra 400 100 negatives My first thought was that Vuescan was seeing an area of blank film and dialling in an extra lot of 'correction' for the orange mask as part of white balance operation. However the selection marquee definitely did not extend beyond the image boundary with these two samples. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
I vote for an option for the two-pane approach--definitely. I didn't like the old VueScan, semi-two pane approach. But, two windows that clearly separate the previewing from setting the options would be a good thing. The preview window should have just the preview and the command buttons to scan, preview, etc. Once the options are set up, the options window could be closed if desired, or, while adjusting the settings, it could be left on top to facilitate changes. Perhaps the options window should have its own set of buttons for scanning. That way if you are not interested the preview window could be closed. .
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests
There's just two small items that really seem lacking to me and really slow me down and frustrate me every time I use it. 1.) A browse for folder button to locate the folder to save files in. If you click Folder and Default (or whatever) a Browse for Folder box does pop up in VS. John M.
re: Scanning multiple times (was Re: filmscanners: Vuescan gripes)
Sometime back Ed mentioned there was a SCSI command that causes an extra 20% exposure on the scanwit and he enables it always. Alan I don't think VS controls exposure time on Scanwits directly - they have an autoexposure system with no manual control. However, I agree it appears something Ed is doing appears to result in longer exposures. It would be interesting to know how this happens - maybe Ed could jump in with a theory/explanation? /fn Epson Inkjet Printer FAQ: http://welcome.to/epson-inkjet
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests
In a message dated 7/23/2001 0:03:25 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's just two small items that really seem lacking to me and really slow me down and frustrate me every time I use it. 1.) A browse for folder button to locate the folder to save files in. You can already do this with the commands in the Folder menu. 2.)A multi-image preview screen for thumbnails. Yes, this would be nice. It's not simple to add this, given that VueScan has to work with a wide range of scanners, many of which can't even move the film holder under VueScan's control. There are other complications too - the special mode that the Nikon scanners use to quickly acquire thumbnails has many subtle problems that are hard to work around. Regards, Ed Hamrick
RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Fe eder
The sensor being cleaned is the sensor that determines the Home position for the carrier, NOT the CCD sensor. David -Original Message- From: Robert Meier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 3:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Fe eder --- Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: be sure to order the free brush to clean the sensor. Are you saying that there is a brush to clean the sensor=CCD? How would you do that? Opening the scanner? Wouldn't you do more damage then any good? Robert __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Dang, you've spotted I'm a hi-fi nutter. But I'm a flat-earther so all that nonsense with green pens and $3000 cables goes right past me. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 20 July 2001 02:56 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Paint the edges of the negatives green, and get some Shitake Stones or what ever they're called, sold at the high end stereo stores...some people swear they improve their sound, so they might improve scanning ;-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( I tried sitting on my scanner (I'm at least 80Kg) but it made no difference, the little begger still makes a rattling noise when it's doing a preview - a bit like a Skoda would do if it was miniaturised. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 19 July 2001 23:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Sorry, and I don't mean to be glib...but perhaps having an 85 pound scanner may be an asset ;-)
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Austin Franklin wrote: Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. I don't fully agree. One can design a very precise metal screw or other method for moving the CCD head assembly, in an enclosed unit internally which could be kept clean and lubricated. Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. Are you a mechanical engineer? Many of the true marvels produced by man were made by people considered uneducated or unskilled in the profession they achieved in. Gaudi had no formal training in architecture, yet he designed and built some of the most memorable architecture in Spain. Some people are just born with a native understanding that often far exceeds anything education can provide. Some kitchen inventors have come up with concepts with no training in the field they excel within. I wouldn't expect you to understand, however. My concern in the use of plastic carriers is the interfacing of the carrier and the stepper motor or other movement method. Gearing between plastic and plastic or metal and plastic is likely to produce wear over time, and result in imprecision. Regarding the SS4000, although it does not apparently need multi-scanning, due to the quality of the CCD which limits noise, I understand that multi-scanning is not as precise due to some aspect of the carrier or positioning design. Art
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
As long as we're using up your programming time here Ed, why not a dual monitor approach as well? Why not have a setup menu to give the user the option of single pane, dual pane, or dual monitors? Bob Kehl - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:02 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes I keep going back and forth on this myself. Most other scanner software uses a 2-pane approach with the options and buttons in one area and an image that's never obscured in another area.
Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright (off-topic)
Here's a further hint on the acceptability of CDs of scanned images. Take a look at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/fls/fl107.pdf (Registration of Photographs). This indicates that Two or more unpublished photographs may be registered as a collection if: 1. The elements are assembled in an orderly form; 2. The combined elements bear a single title identifying the collection as a whole; 3. The copyright claimant in all the elements and in the collection as a whole is the same; and 4. All the of the elements are by the same author... It does not specify the media in which the orderly form must be expressed, leaving open the possibility that CDs are acceptable. I left out one step in the process I follow. I also enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard that says something like: The stamp of the Copyright Office on this card indicates receipt of the following items, and upon the date noted: 1. Registration Form 2. Fee of $30.00 3. Photography by Stan McQueen, 2001 Volume 3 (CD containing scanned images) They stamp it with their official stamp and return it to me. Stan === Photography by Stan McQueen: http://www.smcqueen.com
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
At 18:46 22-07-01 -0400, Johnny Deadman wrote: let me introduce you to the theory of dogfood dogs like dogfood. no, they love it. They slobber all over it. they wolf it down. they can't get enough of it, even though it's total crap why? because we don't feed them steak what is the relevance of this? PC users like vuescan. no, they love it... Well, I'll agree on one similarity of dogs and PCs (not their users, however) Both are pretty much color blind. Art
Re: filmscanners: Scanning Mechanisms
rafeb wrote: At 02:43 AM 7/21/01 -0700, Art wrote: Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. Clearly the film has to be in SOME kind of carrier, whatever the scanner brand. You've missed my point. Most scanners require a film carriers of some sort (the HP S-20 is an exception, as it uses the film edges or slide mount to move the film with rollers). I was suggesting that the method Nikon used which was to use the film carrier to do rough positioning of the frame, and then to have the CCD and optical mechanism move internally at that point to capture the scan, rather than trying to move the carrier, was probably a more precise method. I was trying to give the Nikon design a compliment and even that is misconstrued! ;-) Art
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
Sounds like a dog (and cat) fight to me. Not to take sides, I value all your opinions, but it seems that VueScan is just another tool and is only as good as the person using it. Irrelevant whether it's on a Mac or PC. Even the Mac and PC are just tools, dependent on the user. Larry let me introduce you to the theory of dogfood Well, I'll agree on one similarity of dogs and PCs (not their users, however) Both are pretty much. *** Larry Berman http://BermanGraphics.com http://IRDreams.com http://ImageCompress.com ***
Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests
- Original Message - From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:31 AM Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests Bob Kehl wrote: 2.)A multi-image preview screen for thumbnails. I wouldn't use this as I don't generally batch scan and if I did, it would be set and forget - so multiple thumbnails wouldn't be useful. This is very scanner specific and wouldn't work on scanners without a batch scanning capability or on the nikons with certain film holders eg. the slide holder or film strip holder with the slide holder. If you've ever scanned two images from the same strip, this feature might make a batch scanner out of you. With Nikonscan you click on your image thumbnail set it's rotation, crop, and image adjustments, then click on the next image and do the same. When you've got all the parameters set you click scan and walk away or work on something else. When you come back all your images are scanned and you haven't had to sit and wait for the scanner. Sure beats scanner babysitting! I'm doing 4000dpi scans, usually with ice, on the LS-4000 with the SA-30 35mm roll adapter, so I may have 10-20 images per roll that I want to capture, each with slightly different settings. Setting up these scans can take20-30 minutes. Scanning that many at 4000dpi with ice takes about 30-60 minutes. But even with just 4-6 images on a filmstrip this feature would be a real workflow benefit. If it wasn't for the fact that I can't think of a use for it, I'd love to buy an APS camera just for the convenience of batch scanning an entire roll. I've done this with the LS30, APS adapter, Vuescan and someone else's APS films. It's wonderful - set up vuescan for the film type, type in 1-25 or whatever is appropriate for the number of frames on the film, click scan and walk away. But I already have an SLR and a 35mm compact camera so what use would an APS camera be? The 35mm roll film adapter on the LS-4000 gives you the same functinality. Believe me it IS wonderful! Bob Kehl
Re: filmscanners: OT: Copyright on Photo's
Lynn Allen wrote: Frank wrote: I purchased a set of 4 Landscape Prints at an auction a couple days ago. It is my intention to sell them on eBay, however, they are un-signed so I am not to optimistic. My question is: Can I scan them, and display a small picture of them on eBay for advertising without violating the copyright of the original photographer? Here we go again on the slippery slopes of Intellectual Property! I would say yes, because you own them and you're trying to sell them. Art, Laurie, Bill Gates and Michael Getty would probably say No! I don't know that I will ever forgive you for grouping me with Bill Gates in the same sentence ;-), but actually, I also happen to agree with you, as per my earlier post which you might not have yet seen. Art
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of rafeb Sent: 20 July 2001 14:11 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( At 12:03 PM 7/20/01 +0100, Jawed wrote: Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I disagree, and I'm sure Austin will chime in here too g. All film scanners I've worked with move the film -- except for flatbeds with TPUs. The lamp and CCD stay put. This applies to: * Microtek 35t+ * Polaroid SprintScan Plus * Minolta Scan Speed * Nikon 8000 ED * LeafScan 45 All of the above scanners move the media. CCD and lamp are stationary. In fact, except for flatbeds posing as film scanners, I can't think of any film scanners that *don't* work that way. Well in general I am wrong. But the LS40 and the LS4000 both move the CCD/Light, not the film Jawed
Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
Canada has some type of half-butt registration system. I have never been able to make much sense of it, or what value it has. I suspect, as with most matter of government, they'd rather not be bothered with it ;-) Art Tony Sleep wrote: On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:46:58 -0600 Stan McQueen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm concerned that the effect of your argument will be to convince people that it is not worthwhile to go to the effort of registering their images. For the avoidance of doubt : in most countries except the US, there is no concept of copyright registration. The fact of authorship is all that is required. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
In a message dated 7/23/2001 1:41:15 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I will be very interested to hear when VueScan will support FireWire scanners running under MacOS X. It looks like I now need to wait for Mac OS 10.1 before being able to add FireWire support to OS X. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Fe eder
Its more of a belly button brush than a stomach cleaner ;-) But I'll leave Dave to provide the details. Art Robert Meier wrote: --- Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: be sure to order the free brush to clean the sensor. Are you saying that there is a brush to clean the sensor=CCD? How would you do that? Opening the scanner? Wouldn't you do more damage then any good? Robert __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
In a message dated 7/23/2001 2:38:27 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As long as we're using up your programming time here Ed, why not a dual monitor approach as well? If I made the options one window, the preview another window and the scan a third window, then this would work fine. However, I'm reluctant to make the user interface even more complex than it is already. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. No film scanner I know of uses teeth that mesh with a plastic carrier to move the film during scanning. Some have teeth that mesh with a plastic carrier used for rough positioning of the carrier to the start of the scan. Then a metal screw controlled by a stepper motor is used to move the film 36mm. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 23:11:05 +0100 John Anne Mahany ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: What's this about the brush? Why do we need one? Where do we get it? Dust ingress can eventually cause the SS4000 to lose its marbles over position of the carriage and there's an internal optical sensor which the brush is designed to clean. AFAIK the brush is available on request from Polaroid, but I've not got one nor needed one. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
on 7/23/01 11:25 AM, Shough, Dean at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think we miss the point, but rather we have different priorities. I would love it if VueScan had a better (and more Mac like) interface, but given the choice between improving the guts of VueScan or the interface, I will take the guts anytime. Especially since I can work around the portions of the interface I don't like. If the raw scan is bad there is no work around. Ed could hire 5 programmers to assist him, spend 6 months getting them up to speed before getting anything useful out of them, and raise the price of VueScan from $40 to $400, but I think it would kill VueScan. no honestly this is nuts. If I had a week to spare I could prototype a GUI in RealBasic. There's nothing hard about it. -- John Brownlow http://www.pinkheadedbug.com ICQ: 109343205
Re: Scanning multiple times (was Re: filmscanners: Vuescan gripes)
In a message dated 7/23/2001 2:19:32 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sometime back Ed mentioned there was a SCSI command that causes an extra 20% exposure on the scanwit and he enables it always. I vaguely remember someone telling me that Acer claimed there was a command that caused an extra 20% exposure on the ScanWit. I haven't seen any evidence of this command though, and I don't know where or how it's used. Regards, Ed Hamrick
RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder
John, See the post in reply to Ron Carlson. The brush can be obtained free of charge from your local Polaroid service organization. David -Original Message- From: John Anne Mahany [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 6:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder Hey David, Glad you are pleased with your SS4000. be sure to order the free brush to clean the sensor. What's this about the brush? Why do we need one? Where do we get it? regards, John Mahany New Forest UK
RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
PS. I don't want some long protracted argument over whether a digicam is like a scanner. My point is they use a lens, a CCD, an A-D converter and a computer to convert a physical image into a digital image. Given the vastly superior processing power available to most film scanners they should be capable of much better AUTOMATIC results. This is what Vuescan does so well. I agree completely. In scanning Negs, ROC set to 1 seems to do a very useful job of auto-exposure/colour balance on the large majority of images I've scanned. If you want to keep a colour cast (e.g. a neutrally coloured object totally bathed in evening sunlight) then ROC is no good to you. It also finds it hard to deal with very strong and relatively small highlights and a colour cast across the whole image. In many ways the results ROC 1 produces are quite similar to sample images I've seen on the net with digicams and auto-white balance. It is fair to say, though, that a digicam has an easier time. It has the scene to interpret. A scanner has the film to interpret, as well as the scene. We're talking log-log with wrinkles, rather than simply log... Jawed
RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes
Ed, if you've written the code for both (2-pane and not 2-pane) then couldn't you include both and let the user decide? In your software architecture, it seems to me that the UI is clearly separated from the engine, so this optionality should cost very little. Unless you threw away the some code... Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stan Schwartz Sent: 23 July 2001 04:28 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes Ed, I vote for an option for the two-pane approach--definitely. Stan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 4:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: Vuescan gripes I keep going back and forth on this myself. Most other scanner software uses a 2-pane approach with the options and buttons in one area and an image that's never obscured in another area. Regards, Ed Hamrick
filmscanners: Umax banding
My Umax 1200s flatbed has developed a nasty banding problem (in spite of plugging it into an isolated circuit breaker). I'm calling it banding, but this might be scans lines. In transmissive mode it is apparent throughout. I'm talking about regularly spaced red lines, horizontal to the CCD = perpendicular to the direction of the scan. At magnifications above 100% one sees they are prismatic, but they look red to me at normal viewing magnifications. Four fit inside a 35mm sprocket hole, with their accompanying empty spaces. Interestingly, I've just scanned a typed page in reflective mode (RGB), and I don't see the lines in the white of the page, but I do see it along the edges of type. The optical illusion is that the hollow spaces of the type are filled with the lines, but at higher magnification one sees that is just some spread off the edges, that do not connect at the center. In BW mode there are no lines, but the edges of the type looks like they were streaked by the lines. Finally, if I raise the resolution of the scan it increases the line frequency, and increases their spread. Does this mean it's transport mechanism is beat? It didn't use to do this, but I haven't used it for a while, and I guess it got moved around, otherwise I don't know what might have changed. Could giving it a new SCSI ID help? A whack in the head, or a toss out the window? Todd
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan question
I think so. Go directly to hamrick.com, do not past go :-) I use an LS-40 and am very happy with Vuescan. Occasionally, I will do comparisons between NS3 and Vuescan. Vuescan always is the winner. Marc -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Steve WoolfendenSent: Monday, July 23, 2001 5:27 PMTo: FILMSCANNERSSubject: filmscanners: Vuescan question I'm a little apprehensive asking this question considering the present debate , but , I'm a total novice to scanning and you've got to start somewhere I've just bought a Nikon 4000 scanner , which came with the Nikon Scan3 software .I've not even used it enough to form an opinion about it , but am wondering whether I should be going straight over to vuescan - others have told me its "better". Is this the case and what does it do that the supplied stuff wont? Thanks , Steve p.s. I see a few familiar names from the Contax list here - Hi guys!
filmscanners: artificial light
How filmscanners get away with negatives exposed in tungsten halogen light? I do a lot of stage photography and during the printing process I get quite neutral prints but is this the case with filmscanners? Having made recently contact sheets from my negs on ,y new flatbed I noticed that a frame exposed in tungsten lighting is totally lemon yellow on the scan. Is it coorrectable as in standard photographic process? Regards Tomasz Zakrzewski online portfolio www.zakrzewski.art.pl
filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
Stan wrote: What remedies are available in those countries that have no concept of copyright registration? AFAIK you simply have to be able to establish that you originated the work. With written material, a suggestion which I have received was to send a copy of the work to yourself by registered mail so that an official date is established. A cheaper and possibly less legally watertight method would be to send a copy to someone you trust and ask them to make sure they keep it. You then have some sort of corroboration to your claim from another party. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: SS4000, Win98 and VCache settings
I don't know that vcache has anything to do with the SCSI connection but then with Windows it might. It does have to do with memory error messages with RAM of over 512MB (not your situation) and a starting point for your answer might be at http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q253/9/12.ASP It refers to several other articles and provides MS's cryptic keywords for further search on the topic. Maris - Original Message - From: Stan Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Filmscanners (E-mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 4:06 PM Subject: filmscanners: SS4000, Win98 and VCache settings | I use an SS4000 on a SCSI connection with a Win98SE 933 PentiumIII and 512MB | RAM. | | I was having some problems with the system doing a reboot in the middle of | scanning a transparency, usually with Polacolor Insight. I posted that here | a couple of weeks ago and got some suggestions. | | I also use my computer for speech recognition software (not at the same | time, of course). In the process of tweaking the computer for better speech | recognition, I made some changes in the Vcache settings. | | After making those improvements, I was unable to scan a single slide | without the system suddenly rebooting. It seems there is a connection | between these Vcache settings and the problems I have had. | | Does anyone have experience with tweaking the Vcache settings for a SCSI | slide scanner? I have used a couple of the shareware type programs that | suggest values for power users and multimedia and low memory systems. | | I just changed the settings in system.ini to: | | [vcache] | MaxFileCache=16384 | MinFileCache=3144 | | | | The settings I had been using were min=0, max=131,000 (that was | approximate--it was a correct multiple) with chunk size specified as 4096. | | Now I can finish a scan, but I have no clue what the optimum setting should | be, or if it should be specified at all. | | | Stan | |
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan question
I am one of those who has not found the problems that others report with Nikonscan; I have found it to do what it should do, quickly and with great control. I bought Vuescan after reading how much better it was, but have not found it to be either better or worse, just different and much more difficult to use - for me (who has not spent much time on learning how to cope with its non-G UI). The histogram in Nikonscan I find invaluable: I always feel as though I am flying blind with Vuescan even though the results are usually not bad. Last time I tried Vuescan's IR dust removal I found it didn't work as well for me as ICE, but this may have improved since then, or at least I should say it definitely has improved going by what I have read here. The bottom line for me is that I have both, and I actually use Nikonscan. There are plenty of others for whom the opposite will apply. I will say that for most people there is nothing wrong with Nikonscan, and it is one of the most powerful OEM scanning softwares around. I suggest the obvious - try Nikonscan (which you have) and try Vuescan (try-before-you-buy version) and compare. Then tell us what you discover. Julian PS if it is the learning curve that is worrying you about Nikonscan, I think it is not too bad, and you will learn much about your scanner features and capabilities that would be useful anyway, even if you end up using Vuescan. The Vuescan interface means that you can remain unaware of scanner features for a long time! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Steve Woolfenden Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 5:27 PM To: FILMSCANNERS Subject: filmscanners: Vuescan question I'm a little apprehensive asking this question considering the present debate , but , I'm a total novice to scanning and you've got to start somewhere I've just bought a Nikon 4000 scanner , which came with the Nikon Scan3 software . I've not even used it enough to form an opinion about it , but am wondering whether I should be going straight over to vuescan - others have told me its better. Is this the case and what does it do that the supplied stuff wont? Thanks , Steve p.s. I see a few familiar names from the Contax list here - Hi guys! Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
Re: filmscanners: SS4000, Win98 and VCache settings
Changing the VCache settings should not alter the result, only the speed at which you receive the result :- )Except where you hit the Win9x/ME bug where you must set a value less than 512MB if you have more physical memory than 512MB. As this does not apply to you it suggests you have a problem elsewhere. The fact that the new Vcache settings leave more physical memory available might mean you have a physical memory problem in an area of memory not used by the new setting. It may also be due to a physical memory problem being moved to a more critical point. eg. dodgy memory used for picture storage may have almost undetectable effect on an image but would crash most programs if it was used for program code. Likely sources are: 1) Polarcolor insight problem (try re-installing - anyone else having problems - try 5.0) 2) Physical memory problem (try a decent memory tester or different memory or if you can, remove half at a time) - or try torture test in Prime95 ( http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft.htm ) - this thrashes cpu memory severely. 3) SCSI device or driver problem (try re-installing or removing other devices) 4) BIOS setup issue (careful with this as you can really screw your machine) 5) Problem with a background process (eg.virus program) (remove all non-essential background processes) 6) Other device or driver problem (disable as many devices as possible - physical removal is better) 7) Software conflict problem (particularly related to other SCSI devices) (temporarily remove other devices) To check properly you will after to find a set of scan settings that will reboot your machine everytime - preferably immediately after just booting. Otherwise your current setting for MaxFileCache is a bit low and will probably slow your machine down. Using a value that is slightly larger than your typical TIFF file can make open save work much quicker provided you don't overly restrict available RAM to the actual programs. This can be seen most clearly during a save operation. (eg 35mm 4000dpi is about 54MB 8bit and 108MB 16bit so try around 55000/11 depending on whether you use a lot of 16bit files). Steve - Original Message - From: Stan Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Filmscanners (E-mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:06 PM Subject: filmscanners: SS4000, Win98 and VCache settings I use an SS4000 on a SCSI connection with a Win98SE 933 PentiumIII and 512MB RAM. I was having some problems with the system doing a reboot in the middle of scanning a transparency, usually with Polacolor Insight. I posted that here a couple of weeks ago and got some suggestions. I also use my computer for speech recognition software (not at the same time, of course). In the process of tweaking the computer for better speech recognition, I made some changes in the Vcache settings. After making those improvements, I was unable to scan a single slide without the system suddenly rebooting. It seems there is a connection between these Vcache settings and the problems I have had. Does anyone have experience with tweaking the Vcache settings for a SCSI slide scanner? I have used a couple of the shareware type programs that suggest values for power users and multimedia and low memory systems. I just changed the settings in system.ini to: [vcache] MaxFileCache=16384 MinFileCache=3144 The settings I had been using were min=0, max=131,000 (that was approximate--it was a correct multiple) with chunk size specified as 4096. Now I can finish a scan, but I have no clue what the optimum setting should be, or if it should be specified at all. Stan
RE: filmscanners: OT: Copyright Registration
Thank you Terry. It was a very informative treatise and very worthwhile. There was one sentence that had me wondering: So, for example, if you're an Australian trying to assert a copyright against an infringer in the UK, you go by UK rules; a US registration will probably not help you, unless the UK has some odd departure from the usual system. If you were an Australian bringing an infringement action in the UK, how does a US registration enter into the example at all except under some strange circumstance. I can see how it might enter into the example if one were a US citizen bringing infringement action in the UK but I fail to see why a typical Australian would apply for an US registration in the first place if they were holding an Australian Copyright. A technical point of qualification with respect to your statement: The other thing is that you are ordinarily required to register your copyright prior to bringing suit. That's right; while it is true that you get a copyright automatically by creating a work, you're not able to enforce it until you register. This is only true with respect to bringing legal action under the federal copyright act; you do not need to register the copyright in order to bring legal action in the state courts under state laws for theft of services or property, appropriation of goods and/or services, or some other non-copyright type of legal provision in a state law. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Terry Carroll Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: OT: Copyright Registration There were a number of messages on this lately, and I apologize if posting a response is beating the proverbial dead horse, but I will try to bunch up what would have been multiple replies into this single message. (Up front: I am a lawyer, and copyright is an important part of my practice. I work in-house for a company, not in a law firm and not as a solo practitioner, so I don't represent any clients other than my employer. For credibility's sake, I should add that, in addition to my Real Job, I teach Copyright Law at Santa Clara University School of Law on the side.) In the US, as in most countries, you get a copyright in the work as soon as you create the work; technically the test is that it has to be fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Exposing the film is probably enough, even if it's not yet developed, although I don't know any cases on this in the real world, since you can't copy a photo from undeveloped film. Registration is not a requirement. However, if you have a reasonable belief that you might be infringed, it's not a bad idea. Here's why. Ordinarily, when a copyright is infringed, the copyright owner can either get his economic loss due to the infringement (e.g., lost sales); the infringer's profits due to the infringement; or both, to the extent that they don't overlap (that is, you can't point to a particular sale made by the infringer and count it both as a profit to the infringer and a lost sale for you). But, if you register your work on time, you can elect to get statutory damages instead of (not in addition to) the above measure of damages. Statutory damages are set in the copyright statute, ordinarily in a range of $750 to $30,000, as the court deems just. The ceiling goes up to $150,000 if the infringement is done willfully. It can also go down to $200 for innocent infringement. This is a per-work limit, by the way; so if the infringer is taking, say, four of your photos, the range is $3000 - $120,000, up to $600,000 if willful (or down to $800 if innocent). In addition, and perhaps as importantly as statutory damages, is attorney's fees. You can't get them unless you register on time. You don't necessarily get them if you do register on time, but at least you're eligible. This is in contrast to statutory damages, which you can elect as a matter of right at any time if you're registered on time. So when is on time? Well, for infringement of an unpublished work, your registration will entitle you to statutory damages and make you eligible for attorneys fees if you register prior to when the infringement starts; no fair waiting until you see that you're being infringed, and then filing your registration. For published works, it's timely if you register prior to the start of infringement or any time in the three months following publication. The other thing is that you are ordinarily required to register your copyright prior to bringing suit. That's right; while it is true that you get a copyright automatically by creating a work, you're not able to enforce it until you register. The exception is for non-US works (which essentially means either works that authored entirely by non-US nationals and, if published, are first published outside of the US). Copyright owners of those works can sue without getting a registration (although the limits on
Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder
Thanks David. Your presence on the filmscanner list alone is a strong argument to go with Polaroid. Regards, Ron - Original Message - From: Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:09 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder Ron, Call the 800 technical support number and request the brush for the SS4000. There is a sensor internal to the scanner that can collect dust preventing the scanner from finding it's home position. This brush attached to the front of the carrier. After powering down the scanner you manually pass the carrier back and forth to clean any dust off the sensor. I do not think it is to late to purchase a service contract. I will have a service representative email you directly with details. Regards David -Original Message- From: Ron Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 12:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder David, what free brush and how do I order it? I hadn't heard of an extended warranty. My SS4000 is 15 months old, I suppose it's too late for me to get one now --- not that I need it at the moment. Regards, Ron - Original Message - From: Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:07 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder Preben, I guess I am happy to hear from you :). The bulk feeder is going to be available to the best of my knowledge. Good things don't come quickly :). Each market sets it's own sales and marketing strategies. I was not aware specifically the Europe did not offer an extended warrantee on the scanners. I do know it is not available on film recorders supposedly because Europeans do not purchase them, a cultural issue I am told. I will pass on your comments to my corporate brothers in Europe. Glad you are pleased with your SS4000. be sure to order the free brush to clean the sensor. Regards, David -Original Message- From: Preben Kristensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 ext. warranty and Bulk Slide Feeder This is for David: The extended warranty offer seems to be valid only in the US - now, why is that? Are you planning to cut your sales to only US as well? Or are you selling inferior (Monday/Friday production) units outside US - so it is not worth doing? :-) Please pass this one on to the gods! We are now rapidly approaching the first year anniversary for the impending arrival of the bulk slide feeder. How should we celebrate that? :-) Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the performance? :-) Well, apart from that, I have been extremely happy with the SS4000 which, for a long time was the only suitable machine on the market for my needs! And I have not (touch wood)had any reason to test the repair service in Italy. Greetings from Preben
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 8:50 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan:two small requests In a message dated 7/23/2001 0:03:25 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There's just two small items that really seem lacking to me and really slow me down and frustrate me every time I use it. 1.) A browse for folder button to locate the folder to save files in. You can already do this with the commands in the Folder menu. I checked it out. Yes I missed that earlier. I now stand corrected. Still it would be nice to see this on the files tab. then there'd be one less place to go to adjust settings for a scan. But I'm glad for the function no matter where it is. Thank you. 2.)A multi-image preview screen for thumbnails. Yes, this would be nice. It's not simple to add this, given that VueScan has to work with a wide range of scanners, many of which can't even move the film holder under VueScan's control. There are other complications too - the special mode that the Nikon scanners use to quickly acquire thumbnails has many subtle problems that are hard to work around. Hard? or impossible. If it was easy anyone could do it. : ) Do you feel the challenge? ON a more serious note, maybe this is an item to incorporate into Vuescan Pro, the $400 version. Some of us would pay for this versiion. It's either that or buy Silverfast, which is really expensive since you have to pay for each scanner you want to use, or else we just do without (that is, use NikonScan). To some of us our time is worth a lot of money. If we can get the gorgeous output we get from Vuescan and all the features and stuff we've come accustomed to in other Windows software, we'd pay the price. I realize others can't afford or justify the cost of $400 software (although many of them managed to aquire Adobe Photshop somehow) but a basic version of Vuescan could still be available to those who just want the basic functionality. Best Regards, Bob Kehl
