RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Hemingway, David J]

You got a deal!!!

 -Original Message-
From:   JackG [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent:   Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
Vuescan

Hi David,

Maybe I got lucky, I purchased the SS 4000 on 9/25/01 from Micro Tech.
Some one on this list posted a URL location for the software upgrade at a
special price. I went to the location and after registering the machine etc
I got an E-mail from a nice woman in Fla who asked if I wanted the upgrade
for both. I am very busy this time of year and I haven't had time to use the
new scanner.  I didn't even know what HDR was at that time. She said the
upgrade for both was $20.00.
 I told her that for only another $10.00 I would take it and figure out what
it was later.
 She wanted me to e-mail my credit card number and since I did not want to
do that , I e-mailed her back and left my phone number and she called right
away. Downloaded it, installed it and I will start using it after Christmas.
Total credit card charge was $20.00 for both.

John in OKC

- Original Message -
From: "Hemingway, David J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:34 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


| For any Sprintscan 4000 purchased after 9/01/2001 the upgrade for
Silverfast
| AI is $10 US. For Sprintscan 120 and Sprintscan Ultra the upgrade is free.
| The upgrade price for Silverfast HDR is $45 US
|
| David
|
|  -Original Message-
| From: Skip Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:36 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
| Vuescan
|
| After an inital bout with Silverfast's peculiar interface, I've gotten
over
| its issues.  I use it for most of my scanning.  It's professional
software,
| with a power-users interface.   And its German, which brings its own way
of
| thinking.
|
| Here's my advise on how to get Silverfast to work FOR YOU:
|
| - Go through the IT8 calibration process.
| - Read Ian's tutorials.
| - Don't try to learn it with a deadline staring you in the face
| - Devote a few hours to the program, and it will reward you
|
| As for griping about updates, a $45 udpate that includes the functionality
| updates such as NegFix isn't out of line by any stretch of my imagination.
| Many of us, including me, have been spoiled by Ed Hamrick's steadfast and
| generous low pricing and no-charge updates.  But most of the commercial
| world still has to pay their bills.  Updating software that is customized
| for an OEM product isn't free.  The dot.com model of VC$$+advertisting
| revenue = profits doesn't work.  If you want to stay with what's supplied
in
|
| the box, fine.  Or use Vuescan for $40.  Otherwise, pay the measley $45
for
| the update.  I can't believe that anyone is THAT CHEAP!
|
| Skip
|
|
| >From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
| >Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 10:12:09 +
| >
| >Roger,
| >
| >
| >
| > > SilverFast is very hard
| > >> to learn (there's no adequate instruction manual for it, but one has
| >been
| > >> promised), is expensive to maintain as you have to pay for upgrades,
| >and has
| > >> other disadvantages.
| >
| >
| >The new manual was posted to their PDF pages about 6 weeks back. It is
270
| >pages and includes Negafix, HDR, PhotoCd Job Manager and some other info
| >not
| >previously available. As for upgrades being charged for, yes 5.5 was a
| >charge on existing V5 users but that is VERY rare. The dot releases are
| >usually free. Version upgrades are charged for as most other software
| >companies charge - new user and upgrade are charged at different rates.
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >Ian Lyons
| >
| >http://www.computer-darkroom.com
| >
| >
|
|
| _
| Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
|

Re: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned images for printing

[Op's]

Where can i get more info on this please  URL
thanks
Rob
Ezio c/o TIN wrote:

I'm
often doing so .To do so
I'm using ''Bruce Fraser's sharpening action'' and ''Ultra Sharpen III
action'' in PS6. Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com 
e-photography site ICQ: 139507382

- Original Message -

From:
Chris Hargens

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001
3:25 AM

Subject: filmscanners: Sharpening
scanned images for printing
 I'm curious to know if those who
scan and print 35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above -- typically
sharpen their scanned images before printing. Also, do drum scans require
less sharpening? Chris
Hargens

Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Correction for daylight slides with artif...

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/5/2001 4:49:08 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Bob (in another post) is right. The problem was not with faded film dyes but
>  with the use of a wrong film (daylight slides) with artificial light.

Setting VueScan's "Color|Color balance" to "White balance"
solves this.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: Vuescan and Epson 2450?

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/5/2001 7:13:30 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Does VueScan already support the new
>  Epson Perfection 2450?

Yes.

filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[Rob Geraghty]

Julian wrote:
> Maybe we should ask Ed to use complex numbers (x +iy)
> to represent the focus points

I doubt that many folks on the list would have heard of imaginary numbers,
but I could be wrong - there's a few electrical engineers out there I think!


Rob


Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Ken Durling]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:11:59 -0500, you wrote:

>Actually, LaCie has been around since the beginning of time


I think I missed that event.  :-o


Ken Durling



Photo.net portfolio: 

http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=402251

Re: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned images for printing

[Ezio c/o TIN]

I'm often doing so .
To do so I'm using ''Bruce Fraser's sharpening 
action'' and ''Ultra Sharpen III action'' in PS6.
 
Sincerely.
 
Ezio 
 
www.lucenti.com  e-photography 
site
 
ICQ: 139507382

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Chris Hargens 

  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  
  Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:25 
  AM
  Subject: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned 
  images for printing
  
  I'm curious to know if those who scan and print 
  35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above -- typically sharpen their 
  scanned images before printing. Also, do drum scans require less 
  sharpening?
   
  Chris 
Hargens

Re: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned images for printing

[SKID Photography]

Austin Franklin wrote:

> HI scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all.  I also shoot with Leica and
> Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film, so I can control the
> quality of the development.

Aren't 'sharp' images on film a different issue than sharp scans?

And aren't higher bit level scans sharper than lower bit ones? So the spi would 
not effect how sharp the
scan is, rather it would be the bit depth.

>
> > Also, do drum scans require less sharpening?
>
> I believe a lot of drum scanners do sharpening automatically?

Whether the drum scanner sharpens depends on the software being used.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC

RE: filmscanners: Sharpening scanned images for printing

[Austin Franklin]

Hi Chris,

> I'm curious to know if those who scan and print 35mm negs --using a 3600
dpi
> scanner and above -- typically sharpen their scanned images before
printing.

I scan 35mm at 5080 and do not sharpen at all.  I also shoot with Leica and
Contax (Zeiss) glass, as well as develop my own film, so I can control the
quality of the development.

> Also, do drum scans require less sharpening?

I believe a lot of drum scanners do sharpening automatically?

Regards,

Austin

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Jim Snyder]

- Original Message -
From: "Ken Durling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >It turns out that Lacie's aren't as expensive as I though so I'm going to
> >look at one of those.  NEC is also now made by Mitsubishi so I'll be
looking
> >at those as well.
>
> Never heard of Lacies.  Where can I read about them?
>
Actually, LaCie has been around since the beginning of time, making
reasonably competitive products throughout their business career. Their main
website is at http://www.lacie.com/.

Jim Snyder

filmscanners: Sharpening scanned images for printing

[Chris Hargens]

I'm curious to know if those who scan and print 
35mm negs --using a 3600 dpi scanner and above -- typically sharpen their 
scanned images before printing. Also, do drum scans require less 
sharpening?
 
Chris Hargens

Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[Julian Vrieslander]

On 12/5/01 7:23 PM, John Rylatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:

>If x-y coordinates are to be used, the upper left corner coordinates 
>should be identified
>as '-1, +1'.

That's the convention for mathematical graphing, sure.  In programming 
environments, it's common to define axes so that the down and right 
directions are positive.  I have no idea which of these alternatives 
would be more transparent for the most users.

Maybe we should ask Ed to use complex numbers (x +iy) to represent the 
focus points

Sorry, I'm just being silly again.  This thread is getting long.

--
Julian Vrieslander 

Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[John Rylatt]

If x-y coordinates are to be used, the upper left corner coordinates should be 
identified
as '-1, +1'.

Regards, John.


Julian Vrieslander wrote:
--snip
> 
> I'm not sure that I understand your explanation above.  In an earlier
> message you said that (-1, -1) would be used for the upper left corner.
> Suppose I select "Device | Rotate left" and "Device | Mirror."  Now, when
> I look at VueScan's screen display, is (-1, -1) now the lower right
> corner, or still the upper left?  That is, does the coordinate system
> rotate, flip and mirror with the image, or is it fixed to the VueScan
> display window?
--snip--

RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Johnny Johnson]

At 12:27 PM 11/4/01 -0800, you wrote:

>I didn't get that on the SilverFast site. Is this upgrade available from 
>Polaroid direct?

Told you it was hard to find.  Go to:

http://www.silverfast.com/silverfast/upgrade-polaroid55-en.htm

Their instructions aren't really complete/accurate.  Instead of an Email 
you'll receive a phone call requesting your credit card number.  After you 
give them that you'll receive an Email giving you the download instructions.

Later,
JJ

__
Johnny Johnson
Lilburn, GA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

filmscanners: Vuescan and Epson 2450?

[Bernie Ess]

I forgot if it was mentioned before: Does VueScan already support the new
Epson Perfection 2450?

Thanks Bernhard

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Mikael Risedal]

Regarding monitors
Go to
http://www.macuser.co.uk
and look under labs. Lots of monitor tested here.
or www.macworld.com

IMO the choice is one with hardware calibrator. ( The Rolls Royce of 
monitors are  the Barco monitors)

Mikael Risedal





>From: Lawrence Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: "filmscanners halftone.co.uk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation
>Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:06:27 -0500
>
>
> >
> >
> > Never heard of Lacies.  Where can I read about them?
> >
> >
> > Ken Durling
>
>
>http: //www.lacie.com
>
>
>
>--
>Lawrence W. Smith Photography
>http://www.lwsphoto.com
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>--
>
>


_
Hämta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt på http://explorer.msn.se

Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[Julian Vrieslander]

On 12/5/01 8:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:

>In a message dated 12/5/2001 8:33:39 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>writes:
>
>> How would these numbers relate if the preview were rotated?
>
>They don't - they're relative to the unrotated position.

I've already cast my vote for a "click on the spot" focus UI.  But I 
understand that this requires more work to implement, especially for a 
cross platform app.

I'm not sure that I understand your explanation above.  In an earlier 
message you said that (-1, -1) would be used for the upper left corner.  
Suppose I select "Device | Rotate left" and "Device | Mirror."  Now, when 
I look at VueScan's screen display, is (-1, -1) now the lower right 
corner, or still the upper left?  That is, does the coordinate system 
rotate, flip and mirror with the image, or is it fixed to the VueScan 
display window?

I think it would be best to leave it fixed to the screen, so that (-1, 
-1) is always the upper left corner of the updated VueScan display.  That 
means that a rotate/flip/mirror operation will move the focus to a 
different physical spot on the film.  But if the coordinates transformed 
with the image, the user would need to do mental operations to figure out 
the focus location, and there is no visual confirmation.

If the focus location was set graphically, setting a visible marker in 
the display, I would probably argue for the other convention - with the 
focus point sticking to the same physical spot on the film.

--
Julian Vrieslander 

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Julian Vrieslander]

On 12/5/01 6:14 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:

>In a message dated 12/4/2001 11:34:27 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> I do wish it were possible to have the preview box open and visible as you
>>  make changes on the color tab or device tab.
>
>I'm trying to figure out how to make changes to options affect the
>preview and scan as a live update.

That would be terrific.

Does wxWindows allow you to have more than one window open?  If so, you 
must have given thought to drawing the Preview and Scan in a separate 
window.  That would reduce the user's need to flip between the tabs.  Are 
there strong reasons to keep everything in one window?

--
Julian Vrieslander 

Re: filmscanners: Correction for daylight slides with artificial light

[Mário Teixeira]

Maris explanation applies quite well to my case. Indeed, it is amazingly
simple to get good results tweaking the opacity slide in the "filter layer"
(in mode color, as Robert Wright pointed) -- very easy corrections with
aditional levels and saturation (sometimes) layers gave good results with
all the collection (about 40 recoverable slides). Happily, in ONE of them I
had a zone that should be white (better, gray) -- perhaeps a good indication
to take also a photo from a reference card when shooting under difficult
ilumination conditions (or the wrong film... ), a thing that I didn't ...

Thanks for all the inputs, I learned interesting things.

Mario Teixeira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



"Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

| If using Photoshop you could click with the White eyedropper, the Gray
(pick your own gray numbers for each image) and the Black and you should
have basic adjustments.  But this will not work 100% of the time because
sometimes Curves will be necessary - and very intricate Curves - so the
filter set may well be more useful.  Different objects in the image may have
differing reactions to the fluorescent lighting - some may be fairly OK and
others way off.
|
| Maris
|
| - Original Message -
| From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
| Thanks for the info on your approach to correcting fluorescent lighting.
|
| If you were not interested in having a "filter set" wouldn't just
| clicking with the clear eyedropper in levels at the same (near white)
| location do a basic adjustment?
|
| Art
|
| Mário Teixeira wrote:
|
|  > Thanks Art and all the others that helped. In fact, trying to correct
| with
|  > levels in PS was beeing truely difficult -- I don't remember very
| well the
|  > true color, reproductions in books that I have doesn't seem very
| "true" and

>


_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Correction for daylight slides with artif...

[Mário Teixeira]

Ed,

Bob (in another post) is right. The problem was not with faded film dyes but
with the use of a wrong film (daylight slides) with artificial light.
Perhaeps your filter had done a good job. I must explore my Vuescan copie,
even with slides.

Mario Teixeira
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

| In a message dated 12/3/2001 6:04:40 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| > >VueScan's "Filter|Restore fading" option does this
| >  >automatically.
| >
| >  Ed, does this make the "Fluorescent" colour option in Vuescan obsolete?
|
| The fluorescent option has never been especially useful - it just
| applies a fixed ratio to try to compensate for typical fluorescent
| light colors (i.e. greenish light).

..



_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Ken Durling]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:19:25 -0500 , you wrote:

>
>It turns out that Lacie's aren't as expensive as I though so I'm going to
>look at one of those.  NEC is also now made by Mitsubishi so I'll be looking
>at those as well.


Never heard of Lacies.  Where can I read about them?  


Ken Durling



Photo.net portfolio: 

http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=402251

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Tris Schuler]

Please do point me in the right direction. A simple link to the correct 
page would work.

Tris

>At 08:42 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Tris Schuler wrote:
>
>>Does this mean I'll have to pay $90 to SilverFast to upgrade my copy of 
>>the software which came with the SS4000? I take it they want $45 for both 
>>the AI and HDR modules? Do I have that wrong?
>
>Hi Tris,
>
>It'd be $20 - $10 each for the A1 and HDR modules if you purchased your 
>scanner after 9/1/01.  Let me know if you need help finding the special 
>upgrade page.  It's kinda hidden.
>
>Later,
>JJ

RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Tris Schuler]

I didn't get that on the SilverFast site. Is this upgrade available from 
Polaroid direct?

Tris

>For any Sprintscan 4000 purchased after 9/01/2001 the upgrade for Silverfast
>AI is $10 US. For Sprintscan 120 and Sprintscan Ultra the upgrade is free.
>The upgrade price for Silverfast HDR is $45 US
>
>David

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[JackG]

Hi David,

Maybe I got lucky, I purchased the SS 4000 on 9/25/01 from Micro Tech.
Some one on this list posted a URL location for the software upgrade at a
special price. I went to the location and after registering the machine etc
I got an E-mail from a nice woman in Fla who asked if I wanted the upgrade
for both. I am very busy this time of year and I haven't had time to use the
new scanner.  I didn't even know what HDR was at that time. She said the
upgrade for both was $20.00.
 I told her that for only another $10.00 I would take it and figure out what
it was later.
 She wanted me to e-mail my credit card number and since I did not want to
do that , I e-mailed her back and left my phone number and she called right
away. Downloaded it, installed it and I will start using it after Christmas.
Total credit card charge was $20.00 for both.

John in OKC

- Original Message -
From: "Hemingway, David J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:34 AM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


| For any Sprintscan 4000 purchased after 9/01/2001 the upgrade for
Silverfast
| AI is $10 US. For Sprintscan 120 and Sprintscan Ultra the upgrade is free.
| The upgrade price for Silverfast HDR is $45 US
|
| David
|
|  -Original Message-
| From: Skip Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:36 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
| Vuescan
|
| After an inital bout with Silverfast's peculiar interface, I've gotten
over
| its issues.  I use it for most of my scanning.  It's professional
software,
| with a power-users interface.   And its German, which brings its own way
of
| thinking.
|
| Here's my advise on how to get Silverfast to work FOR YOU:
|
| - Go through the IT8 calibration process.
| - Read Ian's tutorials.
| - Don't try to learn it with a deadline staring you in the face
| - Devote a few hours to the program, and it will reward you
|
| As for griping about updates, a $45 udpate that includes the functionality
| updates such as NegFix isn't out of line by any stretch of my imagination.
| Many of us, including me, have been spoiled by Ed Hamrick's steadfast and
| generous low pricing and no-charge updates.  But most of the commercial
| world still has to pay their bills.  Updating software that is customized
| for an OEM product isn't free.  The dot.com model of VC$$+advertisting
| revenue = profits doesn't work.  If you want to stay with what's supplied
in
|
| the box, fine.  Or use Vuescan for $40.  Otherwise, pay the measley $45
for
| the update.  I can't believe that anyone is THAT CHEAP!
|
| Skip
|
|
| >From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| >Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
| >Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 10:12:09 +
| >
| >Roger,
| >
| >
| >
| > > SilverFast is very hard
| > >> to learn (there's no adequate instruction manual for it, but one has
| >been
| > >> promised), is expensive to maintain as you have to pay for upgrades,
| >and has
| > >> other disadvantages.
| >
| >
| >The new manual was posted to their PDF pages about 6 weeks back. It is
270
| >pages and includes Negafix, HDR, PhotoCd Job Manager and some other info
| >not
| >previously available. As for upgrades being charged for, yes 5.5 was a
| >charge on existing V5 users but that is VERY rare. The dot releases are
| >usually free. Version upgrades are charged for as most other software
| >companies charge - new user and upgrade are charged at different rates.
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >Ian Lyons
| >
| >http://www.computer-darkroom.com
| >
| >
|
|
| _
| Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
|

RE: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Wilson, Paul]

Thanks everybody.

It turns out that Lacie's aren't as expensive as I though so I'm going to
look at one of those.  NEC is also now made by Mitsubishi so I'll be looking
at those as well.

I had a Sony a few years ago that died very prematurely and just out of the
warranty.  Sony refused to do anything worthwhile so I'm not a big fan of
them.

Paul Wilson

Re: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[petru.lauric]

> From: "Hemingway, David J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2001/12/05 Wed AM 11:34:36 EST
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
> 
> For any Sprintscan 4000 purchased after 9/01/2001 the upgrade for Silverfast
> AI is $10 US. For Sprintscan 120 and Sprintscan Ultra the upgrade is free.
> The upgrade price for Silverfast HDR is $45 US

And to add to the confusion: Lasersoft charged me $20, not 10+45, for upgrading Ai and 
HDR (10+10?) to v5.5. 

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Ian Lyons]

Roger,


>> Ian, thanks for the info on the new SilverFast user manual.  I knew they were
>> working on it but I'm surprised that it was released so quickly.  Is it any
>> good?  Will it put you out of business??

It's a lot better than the previous version. Not sure about the out of
business part -they keep adding more features.

> It's a lot easier
>> and less error prone for me to refer to the tables for the settings when
>> doing a scan rather than digging through your tutorials each time to figure
>> out what settings to use.  It would be nice if the new SilverFast
>> documentation included such tables, or at least a well organized description
>> of what settings to use.


I did have tables at one time but the feedback was negative. Folk wanted do
this and that because of, etc. I think that there is no single best way to
present the info. I tried to make the process understandable , after that
the user should find his/her own approach to making it all work in their
workflow.


> If the documentation doesn't do that, you might consider adding a
>> tutorial that summarizes the settings as I've described as I find such a
>> summary very beneficial.

I did a tutorial on the X number of options for the CMS dialog. some like it
and others think that I'm implying that they are stupid - I can't win :-(
Let me see an example of what you mean and I'll give it serious thought.




Ian

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Johnny Johnson]

At 08:42 AM 11/4/01 -0800, Tris Schuler wrote:

>Does this mean I'll have to pay $90 to SilverFast to upgrade my copy of 
>the software which came with the SS4000? I take it they want $45 for both 
>the AI and HDR modules? Do I have that wrong?

Hi Tris,

It'd be $20 - $10 each for the A1 and HDR modules if you purchased your 
scanner after 9/1/01.  Let me know if you need help finding the special 
upgrade page.  It's kinda hidden.

Later,
JJ

__
Johnny Johnson
Lilburn, GA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Maris V. Lidaka, Sr.]

I have the Nikon LS-30 with Nikonscan.  I used Nikonscan for about a week - had to 
fiddle around with numerous level and curve controls etc., got a good result but I 
still had to re-adjust it all in (at that time) Corel PhotoPaint.  The image as seen 
on the NikonScan panels was not of good enough quality or large enough size to adjust 
properly, plus when brought into PhotoPaint it always was different enough from what 
it looked like on the NikonScan screen that it needed further adjustment.

I had already gotten Vuescan to try out on my flatbed, I scanned from the LS-30 
quickly without detailed adjustments - essentially the default settings except for 
inserting the film type and adjusting the crop, and got a scan very good in terms of 
complete information from the film (though it will look bland).  I then adjusted it in 
PhotoPaint - Levels, Curves and sharpening, and my result was better - because I was 
making the fine adjustments using a graphics program where I could see what my 
adjustments would result in better than I could in NikonScan.

To make a long story short, why adjust twice when Vuescan gives me all the film's 
detailed information quickly and easily, and (now) Photoshop tweaks that information 
to my liking.  It makes the scan process itself quick and easy - it has a specific 
film setting for (I estimate) over 90% of all films ever made.  Plus, when adjusting 
Levels and Curves based on a Preview view (which one has to do in a scanning program), 
one can never know for sure what the scan result will actually look like.

Re SilverFast - I only have SilverFast SE (lite) for the Epson flatbed and have barely 
used it, so I can't speak to it's qualities.

Maris


- Original Message - 
From: "Tris Schuler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


| 
| I have to ask this, Maris, and please don't take it the wrong way:  you 
| seem very high on Vuescan. Why? What is it you like about Vuescan over and 
| above SilverFast AI or whatever software that came with the scanner you 
| use? What are the advantages? What are the disadvantages?
| 
| Tris
| 
| >Not to beat a dead horse, but Vuescan will do a RAW scan as well, and if 
| >you were to take a 1/2-hour break from learning Silverfast I guarantee 
| >even you would know enough to use Vuescan well.
| >
| >I have also tried working with RAW scans - the primary problem with 
| >negative film is the orange mask but it can be done.  It's just easier the 
| >regular way.
| >
| >Maris
| 
| 

filmscanners: Vuescan cropping :-)

[Mark Otway]

Okay, I've just had something strange happen. Doing a new film, the
first strip seemed to batch scan absolutely fine - with no frame offset
problems. The second strip had the problems I've been having, where the
first frame was okay, and the second slightly out, and so on.

However, by pure chance I noticed that I'd put the first strip into the
LS-40 'face down', and the second 'face up'. So for some reason I tried
the second strip face-down, and turning the film over seemed to solve
the problem!!!

Any clues as to why this might be happening? Am I completely missing
something fundemental?!

Thanks

Mark

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Maris V. Lidaka, Sr.]

Check Dell Computer for monitors, too - last I heard (and what I have) they carry a 
Dell-branded 19" Sony Trinitron as well as others.  Mine went bad and Dell did the 
same - shipped a new one overnight, and had me return the old in the same box at their 
expense.

Maris

- Original Message - 
From: "Tris Schuler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation


| 
| I have a ViewSonic PT795. Besides the excellent quality of this unit's 
| display, the company seems to stand behind their product all the way. Short 
| version: about a year ago I thought I might have a problem with the monitor 
| (I'm convinced it's simply the nVidia drivers for my GeForce2 GTS card, but 
| at the time it wasn't clear) and called ViewSonic to explain the situation. 
| I didn't ask for anything other than feedback on whether the company had 
| heard of such a situation before (my display would all of a sudden go to a 
| strange speckled pattern across the entire screen, and the only way to get 
| out of this was to reboot, and sometimes that didn't bring the display back 
| properly either). The lady from ViewSonic, then told me she'd ship a new 
| unit the next day and that I should put my monitor into that new units 
| packing box and send it back to them by the same means. All she asked for 
| was a CC to secure the deal temporarily, plus I had to pay shipping one 
| way--back to ViewSonic. This was about a year after I'd purchased the 
| original unit.
| 
| I don't know, but that sounds like exceptional support to me.
| 
| Tris
| 
| >Someone mentioned Viewsonic so although I really haven't intensively
| >compared it with others, I've been very happy with my A90 since I
| >bought it - almost a year ago now.  I'm sure it's been superceded, but
| >its a sharp, clear and bright monitor that I can hold a print up next
| >to a display of the same and not be jarred at all.
| >
| >
| >Ken
| 
|  
| 

filmscanners: Re: film scanner advise sought

[Andy D'Angelo]

Greetings and advise please. I am considering plunging into a film 
scanner and am considering the Nikon. I have been scanning film on a 
Umax Powerlook II  and it seems to do well with 2 1/4 and larger but 
35mm is hit or miss. Most of the scans I produce are for use in ads, 
brochures, background images in catalogues, none produced over 8 .5 x 
11". Working on a G3. Any suggestions/ advise?
Andy
-- 

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Tris Schuler]

Thank you, Roger, and that's exactly why I want to learn how to properly
use SilverFast AI and HDR. I couldn't figure any of that out at first,
though I was led to believe the capability existed in the software, so I
just worked with it inside Paint Shop Pro instead, I want all the
information that's possible from the scans and don't care about the size
of the files--though there is a practical limit for me as my Intel 815
chip only reads 512MB of RAM. I envy those who can put a Gig or three
Gigs in there for this purpose--I would in a heartbeat.
Now, though, based on your prior post to this list, I'm also curious
about the upgrade. Does this mean I'll have to pay $90 to SilverFast to
upgrade my copy of the software which came with the SS4000? I take it
they want $45 for both the AI and HDR modules? Do I have that
wrong?
Tris
It's
often easier to make the color corrections with the scanner software
rather than with Photoshop (and I assume that also applies to Paint Shop
Pro) because scanner software often includes film profiles, which is very
helpful in removing the orange mask from color negative film.  But a
lot of scanner software can't "read" 48-bit raw files, so
you're forced to use Photoshop or equivalent for the color
processing.  That's why I like SilverFast HDR since it can read the
48-bit raw files.  I like to create the 48-bit files with SilverFast
Ai (I use Insight to create them for my medium format scanner as
SilverFast Ai crashes with large files) because I can do the time
consuming color correcting with SilverFast HDR days later if I want to,
and if I make a mistake with the color correction, I can always go back
to the original raw file and start over.  That saves me doing a
rescan.  Some people like to "arch! ive" the raw 48-bit
files as it has all of the information you can possibly get from the
scanner and you might want to process it differently some time
later.  I don't do that as medium format scans at 48-bits are about
600 MB in size and take too much storage room.  If you do a good job
of color correcting in the 48-bit mode, you can convert to 24-bit little
no fear of regrets later. 
I think you'd find it easier to use SilverFast HDR to process your raw
scans, but if Paint Shop Pro works for you, use it. 
In a message dated 12/4/2001 9:22:04 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 

I believe you, Maris, but I'm not
too swift when it comes to learning the 
ins and outs of software. Let me get a handle on SilverFast, then we'll
see. 
On a different note, I finally did a RAW scan and worked with it in Paint

Shop Pro  until the result matched my mind's eye of what the scene
looked 
like when I tripped the shutter. Up until now I exported TIFF files 

exclusively from Insight. Do others here work with RAW images? What are

your results? I kind of like it. 
Tris 

RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Hemingway, David J]

For any Sprintscan 4000 purchased after 9/01/2001 the upgrade for Silverfast
AI is $10 US. For Sprintscan 120 and Sprintscan Ultra the upgrade is free.
The upgrade price for Silverfast HDR is $45 US

David 

 -Original Message-
From:   Skip Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent:   Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
Vuescan

After an inital bout with Silverfast's peculiar interface, I've gotten over 
its issues.  I use it for most of my scanning.  It's professional software, 
with a power-users interface.   And its German, which brings its own way of 
thinking.

Here's my advise on how to get Silverfast to work FOR YOU:

- Go through the IT8 calibration process.
- Read Ian's tutorials.
- Don't try to learn it with a deadline staring you in the face
- Devote a few hours to the program, and it will reward you

As for griping about updates, a $45 udpate that includes the functionality 
updates such as NegFix isn't out of line by any stretch of my imagination.  
Many of us, including me, have been spoiled by Ed Hamrick's steadfast and 
generous low pricing and no-charge updates.  But most of the commercial 
world still has to pay their bills.  Updating software that is customized 
for an OEM product isn't free.  The dot.com model of VC$$+advertisting 
revenue = profits doesn't work.  If you want to stay with what's supplied in

the box, fine.  Or use Vuescan for $40.  Otherwise, pay the measley $45 for 
the update.  I can't believe that anyone is THAT CHEAP!

Skip


>From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
>Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 10:12:09 +
>
>Roger,
>
>
>
> > SilverFast is very hard
> >> to learn (there's no adequate instruction manual for it, but one has 
>been
> >> promised), is expensive to maintain as you have to pay for upgrades, 
>and has
> >> other disadvantages.
>
>
>The new manual was posted to their PDF pages about 6 weeks back. It is 270
>pages and includes Negafix, HDR, PhotoCd Job Manager and some other info 
>not
>previously available. As for upgrades being charged for, yes 5.5 was a
>charge on existing V5 users but that is VERY rare. The dot releases are
>usually free. Version upgrades are charged for as most other software
>companies charge - new user and upgrade are charged at different rates.
>
>
>
>
>Ian Lyons
>
>http://www.computer-darkroom.com
>
>


_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

Re: filmscanners: Monitor recommendation

[Tris Schuler]

I have a ViewSonic PT795. Besides the excellent quality of this unit's 
display, the company seems to stand behind their product all the way. Short 
version: about a year ago I thought I might have a problem with the monitor 
(I'm convinced it's simply the nVidia drivers for my GeForce2 GTS card, but 
at the time it wasn't clear) and called ViewSonic to explain the situation. 
I didn't ask for anything other than feedback on whether the company had 
heard of such a situation before (my display would all of a sudden go to a 
strange speckled pattern across the entire screen, and the only way to get 
out of this was to reboot, and sometimes that didn't bring the display back 
properly either). The lady from ViewSonic, then told me she'd ship a new 
unit the next day and that I should put my monitor into that new units 
packing box and send it back to them by the same means. All she asked for 
was a CC to secure the deal temporarily, plus I had to pay shipping one 
way--back to ViewSonic. This was about a year after I'd purchased the 
original unit.

I don't know, but that sounds like exceptional support to me.

Tris

>Someone mentioned Viewsonic so although I really haven't intensively
>compared it with others, I've been very happy with my A90 since I
>bought it - almost a year ago now.  I'm sure it's been superceded, but
>its a sharp, clear and bright monitor that I can hold a print up next
>to a display of the same and not be jarred at all.
>
>
>Ken

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Tris Schuler]

I have to ask this, Maris, and please don't take it the wrong way:  you 
seem very high on Vuescan. Why? What is it you like about Vuescan over and 
above SilverFast AI or whatever software that came with the scanner you 
use? What are the advantages? What are the disadvantages?

Tris

>Not to beat a dead horse, but Vuescan will do a RAW scan as well, and if 
>you were to take a 1/2-hour break from learning Silverfast I guarantee 
>even you would know enough to use Vuescan well.
>
>I have also tried working with RAW scans - the primary problem with 
>negative film is the orange mask but it can be done.  It's just easier the 
>regular way.
>
>Maris

Re: filmscanners: Tips for SS4000, Insight, VueScan, laptops

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/5/2001 9:23:27 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Thinking back to your posts on not wanting to install an 
>  extension on Macs, I can see why you'd like to keep VS as self-contained & 
>  unintrusive as possible.  If only other software developers would  Oh, 
>  don't get me started.

Exactly.  When someone blames VueScan on messing up their
computer, I can definitely say that VueScan has nothing to do
with the problems.  It doesn't install _anything_, so it can't ever
be the source of a problem messing up someone's system.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[filmscanner]

> Could you describe some error messages you'd like to see?

All errors that are related to 'file not found' / 'directory not found'

All errors that may occur when a user chooses values outside of the
acceptable range. I believe VueScan just goes and uses the maximum possible value,
but does not tell you so. A warning would be nice.

Best regards, Barbara Nitz

-- 
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net

Re: filmscanners: Re: VueScan Improvements Was: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[JackG]

Hi Rob,

As a "newby" to film scanning, I would be thrilled to read your tutorial. I
purchased a SS4000 a couple of months ago, but due to workload this time of
year, I have just scanned a couple of slides to make sure it worked.

TIA,

John in OKC

- Original Message -
From: "Rob Geraghty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 1:02 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: VueScan Improvements Was: Re: filmscanners:
Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


| "Preston Earle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >| Perhaps it would be helpful for some of you guys who know the program
| >| from a user's standpoint to write some instructions on how you scan,
| >| what settings you use (and why), what works for you and what doesn't.
| >| Knowing what scanner you use and your expectations (low, medium, high)
| >| would be helpful. Us neophytes could study through them and pick up a
| >| lot of knowledge you've dredged from the hard school of experience.
|
| Ed asked if anyone was interested in writing documentation a while back,
| and I made an offer.  I don't remember why I was turned down.  I would be
| happy to write a tutorial if others want to send me their suggestions
(preferably
| an outline of the workflow you use), or just an outline of the workflow
| I use.
|
| A lot depends on the software you use, what kind of film you are scanning,
| what scanner you're using, etc.  Hopefully the basics would translate
reasonably
| well from one *film* scanner to another.
|
| Rob
|
|
| Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| http://wordweb.com
|
|
|
|

Re: filmscanners: Tips for SS4000, Insight, VueScan, laptops

[bob geoghegan]

Thanks, Ed.  Thinking back to your posts on not wanting to install an 
extension on Macs, I can see why you'd like to keep VS as self-contained & 
unintrusive as possible.  If only other software developers would  Oh, 
don't get me started.

Bob

At 02:40 AM 12/5/2001, you wrote:
>In a message dated 12/4/2001 8:18:26 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > Sorry, I should've been more careful before posting that.  Perhaps it's a
> >  registry setting.  On my PC that could also involve a Silverfast upgrade
> >  from 5.2 to 5.5.  Does the VS install touch the registry?
>
>VueScan stores the serial number in the registry (in the Windows
>version), but that's all.  It's stored under the VuePrint key.
>
>Regards,
>Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[JackG]

Hi Roger,

Would you post your tables?

John in OKC

- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:00 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


| Ian, thanks for the info on the new SilverFast user manual.  I knew they
were
| working on it but I'm surprised that it was released so quickly.  Is it
any
| good?  Will it put you out of business??
|
| For what it's worth, I made a series of tables showing what settings to
use
| with SilverFast.  They were based on your tutorials.  For example, three
| tables show the settings to use when scanning negative film (with
SilverFast
| NegaFix) with SilverFast Ai in the 48-bit mode, for SilverFast Ai in the
| 24-bit mode, and for SilverFast HDR (48-bit files).  I made three more
| similar tables for use when scanning transparency film.  It's a lot easier
| and less error prone for me to refer to the tables for the settings when
| doing a scan rather than digging through your tutorials each time to
figure
| out what settings to use.  It would be nice if the new SilverFast
| documentation included such tables, or at least a well organized
description
| of what settings to use.  (I haven't had time to check the new
documentation
| yet.)  If the documentation doesn't do that, you might consider adding a
| tutorial that summarizes the settings as I've described as I find such a
| summary very beneficial.
|
| In a message dated 12/4/2001 2:17:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| writes:
|
|
| > The new manual was posted to their PDF pages about 6 weeks back. It is
270
| > pages and includes Negafix, HDR, PhotoCd Job Manager and some other info
not
| > previously available. As for upgrades being charged for, yes 5.5 was a
| > charge on existing V5 users but that is VERY rare. The dot releases are
| > usually free. Version upgrades are charged for as most other software
| > companies charge - new user and upgrade are charged at different rates.
| >
| > Ian Lyons
| >
|
|
|

Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/5/2001 8:33:39 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> How would these numbers relate if the preview were rotated?

They don't - they're relative to the unrotated position.

I'm fairly sure most people will just leave this at the default values
(-0.33, -0.33).

>Knowledgably guessing should be accurate enough, but is there anyway you
>  can add feedback from the cursor position?

The auto focus value is quite insensitive to the actual focus position.
Guessing is good enough.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

RE: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[michael shaffer]

Ed writes ...

> ...
> I'm going to add a focus offset x/y option, with zero being the
> center, -1 being the left (or top) and 1 being the right
> (or bottom).
>
> If focusing is done with the preview, these will be relative
> to the entire preview.  If focusing is done with the scan,
> these will be relative to the cropped area.

  How would these numbers relate if the preview were rotated? (... it would
be a difficult mental excercise for us dyslexics if your axes didn't rotate
with the preview ...)

  Knowledgably guessing should be accurate enough, but is there anyway you
can add feedback from the cursor position?

(... never satisfied ..) shAf  :o)

RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!

[Charles Knox]

At 03:12 PM 12/4/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Also, as David mentioned, sometimes the SCSI bus won't recognize the scanner
>if it's been shut off and I haven't rebooted the machine.  In other words,
>turn on sscanner, boot pc, wait until PC is up and running, shut off scanner
>and then turn it on again hours later.  The PC is a home-built dual PIII 866
>running Win2K and the scanner is hooked to an Adaptec 29160N
>
>Neither of these is a huge deal, especially the reboot thing, (snip)

If you turn your scanner on, go into Device Manager (Win-Key -
pause/break), open the SCSI controllers listing, right-click on your SCSI
adapter and click Refresh under the General tab, you shouldn't need to
restart.

Charles

filmscanners: Re: Automatic "best focus average" solution for selecting focus point? (was R...

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/4/2001 10:19:14 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Would it be possible to add an automatic "multi-point" focus option,
>  which would internally manually take focus at say 9 points across the 
image,
>  then select the best average that represents the happy medium of all these
>  points (perhaps also rejecting points for areas of low contrast), then 
using
>  that average as the focus value.

All things are possible, but it would take far, far too long to actually
do this multi-point focus for it to be useful to many people.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/4/2001 11:34:27 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> I do wish it were possible to have the preview box open and visible as you
>  make changes on the color tab or device tab.

I'm trying to figure out how to make changes to options affect the
preview and scan as a live update.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/4/2001 7:49:22 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> I don't pine for fancy UI gewgaws either -- hell, I'd probably be
>  entirely happy with a mostly command-line scanning infrastructure.
>  The one thing I'd love to see corrected is that in my admittedly
>  limited tenure with Vuescan, I haven't yet seen an error message.

Could you describe some error messages you'd like to see?

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus test)

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/5/2001 1:38:10 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> I followed the above suggestions as closely as I could.  The new results 
>  can be examined at:
>  
>  

I'm convinced.

I'm going to add a focus offset x/y option, with zero being the
center, -1 being the left (or top) and 1 being the right
(or bottom).

If focusing is done with the preview, these will be relative
to the entire preview.  If focusing is done with the scan,
these will be relative to the cropped area.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Re: filmscanners: link to Minolta Multi Pro review

[Bernie Ess]

Both Ed Hamrick and Ken Rockwell say that there is very little noise, users
said the same, why do you worry? Sanning with ICE is always *much* slower
than without, and with the plug-in scan times seem more than reasonable.

I received some informations by Minolta about the Multi Pro today (well,
nothing but shining promises, but what did I expect!) and wait now for 2
persons that will scan me a 6x6 negative with the Polaroid 120 and the
Minolta Pro. If the Polaroid is not visibly better, I go for the Minolta,
its cheaper and has ICE.

Greetings Bernhard

- Original Message -
From: "DRP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:36 AM
Subject: filmscanners: link to Minolta Multi Pro review


> Hi all
>
> I found an user review for the new
> Minolta multi at : http://www.kenrockwell.com/minolta/mp.htm
>
> Remaining questions for me are CCD noise and scanning time with ICE
>
> Comments and adds welcome!
>
> Regards
>
> Didier
>

RE: filmscanners: Vuescan Interface, was Polaroid Insight vs

[Mark Otway]

>> Yes, the interface is quite usable, and I don't want to end 
>> up with another 'pretty' but unfunctional product (not much 
>> of a risk of that from Ed, I suspect!).  But I do think that 
>> Vuescan could use a *bit* of a facelift.

I think people are forgetting that the app is a cross-platform one, for
Mac, Windows and Unix. Having done various cross-platform development
myself (including an app which ran on both the Mac and Windows) I know
precisely how much of a pain it is to write any sort of GUI which will
work on two (or more) different Windowing environments. 

I'm presuming that Ed is using a single set of cross-platform code,
which explains the simplicity of the interface. Pretty and poncy UI
features are totally impractical to code for all three environments.

In actual fact, I like the simplistic interface in VS - there's little
or no clutter and for the function I use it for (large numbers of batch
scans) it's pretty much perfect.

Other than the auto-frame-offset thing I keep whinging about (!) it's
just about right for what I need - tarting up the GUI is more likely to
spoil the app than improve it, particularly as individuals perceptions
of what a good GUI is made up of can be totally subjective, especially
where multiple environments are involved.

Mark

PS: As many of you will have gathered from this post, I'm actually a
software developer myself. Without plugging too blatantly you might be
interested in the software I've written - it's an offline browser which
allows you to download whole websites and save copies of them to your
hard disk - particularly useful for viewing online galleries without
needing an active web connection. The software (Windows-only, I'm
afraid) is FREE, and can be downloaded from www.webreaper.net :-)

RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Mark Otway]

>> What free upgrades do is encourage good word of mouth 
>> referrals.  Word of mouth referrals are very effective, 
>> especially "word of e-mail" referrals.

This is true - I didn't hesitate to register my copy of VS after being
on this list and owning my scanner for just a week!

The only problem I have with Ed being so quick to release upgrades and
incorporate this list's feedback into Vuescan, is that I'm almost
tempted to hold of scanning some of my films in readiness for the next
new-and-improved version!!!

Mark

filmscanners: link to Minolta Multi Pro review

[DRP]

Hi all

I found an user review for the new
Minolta multi at : http://www.kenrockwell.com/minolta/mp.htm

Remaining questions for me are CCD noise and scanning time with ICE

Comments and adds welcome!

Regards

Didier

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Maris V. Lidaka, Sr.]

Yes, but that would require a preview rescan anyway, which could be made automatic, 
absent a MAJOR modification of the program.

But I'm not a programmer so I'll leave any further comments to Ed.

Maris

- Original Message - 
From: "Hersch Nitikman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 1:52 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan


Maris, if I understood Stan, he'd like a dynamic update of the preview, 
like Photoshop does with the Levels dialog box, and others, so you can see 
what you are doing, as you do it..
Hersch

At 10:43 PM 12/04/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>What difference would that make, as the changes would not appear until you 
>clicked "Preview" again or "Prev Mem"?
>
>Maris
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "S Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:31 PM
>Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
>
>
>Ed,
>
>I do wish it were possible to have the preview box open and visible as you
>make changes on the color tab or device tab. I recall you mentioned that as
>a possible user-selectable option in the future.
>
>Stan
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:30 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
>Vuescan
>
>
>In a message dated 12/4/2001 4:55:46 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I´d like to add a question: Its true that VueScan has gained a very
> >  favorable reputation amongst serious scanner users (I like the results
>too),
> >  however almost everybody seems to agree - me included - that the user
> >  interface is not only "unpleasing to the eye" but also not very
>confortable.
> >  No buttons or shortcuts, no browser boxes for file locations etc etc -
>it´s
> >  a bit like shareware 6 or 7 years ago.
>
>You think it's ugly now - you should have seen it a year ago .
>
>It's improving a lot more rapidly than you realize.  I just did
>a count, and there have been 199 releases since March 1999.
>That's an average of one new version every 5 days for almost
>three years.
>
> >  So, have you planned to modernize - at a moment when no new important
> >  scanner is released - the GUI in the future?
>
>I plan on continuing to improve it with a new version every
>3 or 4  days.  I don't plan on revolutionary change, but instead
>on evolutionary change.
>
>For instance, I'm very close to adding dialog boxes for
>file name selection instead of typing file names.
>
>Regards,
>Ed Hamrick
>
>
>

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[RogerMillerPhoto]

It's often easier to make the color corrections with the scanner software rather than with Photoshop (and I assume that also applies to Paint Shop Pro) because scanner software often includes film profiles, which is very helpful in removing the orange mask from color negative film.  But a lot of scanner software can't "read" 48-bit raw files, so you're forced to use Photoshop or equivalent for the color processing.  That's why I like SilverFast HDR since it can read the 48-bit raw files.  I like to create the 48-bit files with SilverFast Ai (I use Insight to create them for my medium format scanner as SilverFast Ai crashes with large files) because I can do the time consuming color correcting with SilverFast HDR days later if I want to, and if I make a mistake with the color correction, I can always go back to the original raw file and start over.  That saves me doing a rescan.  Some people like to "arch!
ive" the raw 48-bit files as it has all of the information you can possibly get from the scanner and you might want to process it differently some time later.  I don't do that as medium format scans at 48-bits are about 600 MB in size and take too much storage room.  If you do a good job of color correcting in the 48-bit mode, you can convert to 24-bit little no fear of regrets later.

I think you'd find it easier to use SilverFast HDR to process your raw scans, but if Paint Shop Pro works for you, use it.

In a message dated 12/4/2001 9:22:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


I believe you, Maris, but I'm not too swift when it comes to learning the 
ins and outs of software. Let me get a handle on SilverFast, then we'll see.

On a different note, I finally did a RAW scan and worked with it in Paint 
Shop Pro  until the result matched my mind's eye of what the scene looked 
like when I tripped the shutter. Up until now I exported TIFF files 
exclusively from Insight. Do others here work with RAW images? What are 
your results? I kind of like it.

Tris

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[RogerMillerPhoto]

I agree that $45US to upgrade SilverFast is not an unreasonable price.  However, it's more complicated than that.  A lot of us paid a lot of money for SilverFast only to learn that the new version was released before we even got our version installed and working.  Lasersoft should give free upgrades to anyone who purchases an older version six months or less before the release of a newer version.  We felt like we were ripped off when we paid full price for obsolete software.  Then there's the misleading description of the upgrade on the Lasersoft website that led a lot of us to believe that the upgrade included both SilverFast Ai and HDR.  It didn't, so the upgrade price was actually $90.  The upgrade should include both Ai and HDR since the software for both is virtually identical, it costs Lasersoft nothing extra to upgrade both vs. just one, and the user can only use one at a time and really!
 doesn't receive any real extra value from upgrading both vs. just one (for example, upgrade only HDR and then use an old version of Ai to create raw files for the upgraded HDR).  In addition to this, Lasersoft suffered a complete and total meltdown when they released the upgrade (passwords that didn't work, etc.) and were not responsive to request for support (most likely due to the number of requests for help they received).  On top of that, the software was/is buggy with not a lot of help or support from Lasersoft in getting it to work.  Maybe Lasersoft could hire Ed Hamrick for a few weeks to get their house in order, and then I would feel a lot better about spending $45 for the upgrade (but $90 is too much).

In a message dated 12/4/2001 8:40:52 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


As for griping about updates, a $45 udpate that includes the functionality 
updates such as NegFix isn't out of line by any stretch of my imagination.  
Many of us, including me, have been spoiled by Ed Hamrick's steadfast and 
generous low pricing and no-charge updates.  But most of the commercial 
world still has to pay their bills.  Updating software that is customized 
for an OEM product isn't free.  The dot.com model of VC$$+advertisting 
revenue = profits doesn't work.  If you want to stay with what's supplied in 
the box, fine.  Or use Vuescan for $40.  Otherwise, pay the measley $45 for 
the update.  I can't believe that anyone is THAT CHEAP!

Skip

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[RogerMillerPhoto]

Ian, thanks for the info on the new SilverFast user manual.  I knew they were working on it but I'm surprised that it was released so quickly.  Is it any good?  Will it put you out of business??

For what it's worth, I made a series of tables showing what settings to use with SilverFast.  They were based on your tutorials.  For example, three tables show the settings to use when scanning negative film (with SilverFast NegaFix) with SilverFast Ai in the 48-bit mode, for SilverFast Ai in the 24-bit mode, and for SilverFast HDR (48-bit files).  I made three more similar tables for use when scanning transparency film.  It's a lot easier and less error prone for me to refer to the tables for the settings when doing a scan rather than digging through your tutorials each time to figure out what settings to use.  It would be nice if the new SilverFast documentation included such tables, or at least a well organized description of what settings to use.  (I haven't had time to check the new documentation yet.)  If the documentation doesn't do that, you might consider adding a tutorial that summarizes the settings as I've described as I fi!
nd such a summary very beneficial.

In a message dated 12/4/2001 2:17:31 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


The new manual was posted to their PDF pages about 6 weeks back. It is 270
pages and includes Negafix, HDR, PhotoCd Job Manager and some other info not
previously available. As for upgrades being charged for, yes 5.5 was a
charge on existing V5 users but that is VERY rare. The dot releases are
usually free. Version upgrades are charged for as most other software
companies charge - new user and upgrade are charged at different rates.

Ian Lyons

Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan

[Hersch Nitikman]

Maris, if I understood Stan, he'd like a dynamic update of the preview, 
like Photoshop does with the Levels dialog box, and others, so you can see 
what you are doing, as you do it..
Hersch

At 10:43 PM 12/04/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>What difference would that make, as the changes would not appear until you 
>clicked "Preview" again or "Prev Mem"?
>
>Maris
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "S Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:31 PM
>Subject: RE: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs. Vuescan
>
>
>Ed,
>
>I do wish it were possible to have the preview box open and visible as you
>make changes on the color tab or device tab. I recall you mentioned that as
>a possible user-selectable option in the future.
>
>Stan
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:30 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid Insight vs. Silverfast AI vs.
>Vuescan
>
>
>In a message dated 12/4/2001 4:55:46 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I´d like to add a question: Its true that VueScan has gained a very
> >  favorable reputation amongst serious scanner users (I like the results
>too),
> >  however almost everybody seems to agree - me included - that the user
> >  interface is not only "unpleasing to the eye" but also not very
>confortable.
> >  No buttons or shortcuts, no browser boxes for file locations etc etc -
>it´s
> >  a bit like shareware 6 or 7 years ago.
>
>You think it's ugly now - you should have seen it a year ago .
>
>It's improving a lot more rapidly than you realize.  I just did
>a count, and there have been 199 releases since March 1999.
>That's an average of one new version every 5 days for almost
>three years.
>
> >  So, have you planned to modernize - at a moment when no new important
> >  scanner is released - the GUI in the future?
>
>I plan on continuing to improve it with a new version every
>3 or 4  days.  I don't plan on revolutionary change, but instead
>on evolutionary change.
>
>For instance, I'm very close to adding dialog boxes for
>file name selection instead of typing file names.
>
>Regards,
>Ed Hamrick
>
>
>

Re: filmscanners: Tips for SS4000, Insight, VueScan, laptops

[EdHamrick]

In a message dated 12/4/2001 8:18:26 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> Sorry, I should've been more careful before posting that.  Perhaps it's a 
>  registry setting.  On my PC that could also involve a Silverfast upgrade 
>  from 5.2 to 5.5.  Does the VS install touch the registry?

VueScan stores the serial number in the registry (in the Windows
version), but that's all.  It's stored under the VuePrint key.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick