filmscanners: Vuescan - film types
I rely on the film profiles in Vuescan to get me somewhere near accurate colours when scanning colour neg, especially as I am partially colour blind. However I have had some trouble recently using Fuji Superia 400, S-400. I am finding the Super G 400 G2 profile is quite cold and I am having to use the Neutral setting instead of White Balance but it is often too warm! I have tried to scan the film base but with no success - it just ends up being a grain filled blue/yellow mess - I was hoping to do my own profile and lock the colour. Any guidance or advice would be much appreciated. Philip Elkin
Re: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus
I'm a Freeserve user, yet I've had these messages. I spotted the offending virus-containing message as dodgy and deleted it immediately on arrival. Regards, Alan T - Original Message - From: Steve Greenbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:13 AM Subject: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus I've noticed several e-mails about viruses on this e-mail list non of which I seem to have received. On further investigation I have discovered that my service provider Freeserve (cheap almost cheerful) will not allow dodgy attachments such as *.exe or *.vbs they just bounce. Harmless files such as jpg can be attached as normal. They do not advertise this point probably for fear of a breach of security but the policy clearly exists. eg. This is what happens if you attach something.vbs : A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This message has been rejected because it has an apparently executable attachment SM1.VBS This is a virus prevention measure. If you meant to send this file then please package it up as a zip file and resend it. This strikes me as rather sensible all round. It's not in the interests of the users or service providers to have viruses generating large volumes of traffic, using zip tends to make users think twice about opening the file and will at least prevent automatic propagation. Much as I am against the idea of a net nanny this seems to be a very sensible idea - forcing the use of a zip file will usually reduce the bandwidth requirement too. Perhaps we should all suggest to our service providers that they should impliment a similar scheme. Steve
Re: filmscanners: Prime Film Scanner1800u
I downloaded several full size but JPEGED samples from the first link below. I looked at them in Photoshop under magnification. They seem fairly highly jpeged (they are blocky as is typical of jpeg compression). One image, at 1990 x 1602 pixels is only 411kb in size, the other at 2386 x 1638 pixels is only 1.1 meg, so obviously they have been heavily compressed. Even so, the 1.1 meg image doesn't look too bad. Shadows are blocked up, but, I see no banding or color fringing, as I have on the HP Photosmart scans. I'd even suggest the resolution (at 1800 dpi) might be sharper than the HP model. Color rendition is pretty good also, although without the original it is hard to say for sure. I have seen scans from the Primescan 1800 directly from the scanner, and I was impressed (relative to the cost of the scanner). I cannot speak for the software, interfacing, speed or anything else. If the person is only making drug store prints anyway, which usually are about 200 dpi, I would say the Primescan is an adequate scanner fro 4 x 6 or a bit larger prints. I also read the comments from the second link, and obviously the people who reviewed it didn't think much of it. Could be a mixture of expectations and variation in quality of the units coming off the line. This is often a problem with lower/middle end products Art [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Like Art, I can't comment on how easily it sets up on a Mac, but here are 2 sites about it. I suggest visiting both, because they express rather different views..! http://twcny.rr.com/technofile/texts/tec081901.html http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-2295735-404-6525926.html My guess would be if your client: - uses the Zone System and knows the difference between Velvia and Sensia, s/he won't like it much.. - is after nothing more than 7 x 5 prints, and accepts that some images will not scan well, eg underexposed slides, they'll love it! :-) mark t From: DaleH [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: Prime Film Scanner1800u I'm trying to get a client started in scanning film instead of drugstore snapshots and wondered if anyone had anything to say about the Prime 1800u film scanner costing under $200 at CompUSA? It would be used on a Mac. I don't want to get them involved in buggy driver or other compatibility issues. DaleH .
filmscanners: APS Scanner AS-1
Hi! k Maybe I'm on the completly false list, but I have to try. I got the AS-1 second hand with no software included. I tried downloading the twain-driver from fujifilm.com. Shortly, it doesn't work. Has anyone of you knowledge of a driver version greater 1.0 ? Thanks a lot cu Karl
Re: filmscanners: Rescans and archiving
Les Berkley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a couple rolls of Kodachrome that my father shot (Leica IIIc) when I was 3 mos old. That makes them (shudder) over fifty years old. They look like the day they came back from Kodak. (Hell to scan though.) The archival nature of Kodachrome is awesome. It's a shame that the technology is being displaced by ektachrome in that respect. However I believe the modern Ektachrome films are much more archival than earlier versions. Rob
RE: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus
Perhaps we should all suggest to our service providers that they should impliment a similar scheme. The ISP that hosts my website and provides my mail has a virus-checker running on the pop and smtp servers. This means that I *cannot* receive a virus, and if I accidently catch one it can't be sent either. He keeps the virus-checker totally up to date. That's much more sensible than just blocking certain types of attachments. I don't run any anti-virus software, and in 6 years of regular internet use I've never had a virus. Not once. Mark
RE: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus
Perhaps we should all suggest to our service providers that they should impliment a similar scheme. The ISP that hosts my website and provides my mail has a virus-checker running on the pop and smtp servers. This means that I *cannot* receive a virus, and if I accidently catch one it can't be sent either. He keeps the virus-checker totally up to date. That's much more sensible than just blocking certain types of attachments. I don't run any anti-virus software, and in 6 years of regular internet use I've never had a virus. Not once. Mark http://www.otway.com
filmscanners: OT: film sleeves
I have a (probably OT-sorry) question: What are your advices according to negative sleeves. I have just bought and used several hundreds of acetate sleeves. But there are opinions that pergamin sleeves are beter, as the pose no danger in keeping humidity with the film. There are also opinions that neither acetate nor pergamin sleeves should be used as the are not archival. Polyethylen or polypropylen are better and Mylar is the best. I'm looking for reasonable advices. I don't want to follow the route "but the most expensive material and you're on the safe side". Regards Tomasz Zakrzewski
filmscanners: Re: Rescans and archiving
At 11:26 PM +1000 12/12/01, Rob Geraghty wrote: The archival nature of Kodachrome is awesome. It's a shame that the technology is being displaced by ektachrome in that respect. However I believe the modern Ektachrome films are much more archival than earlier versions. Yes, that is true, but they still don't match the Fujichromes for longevity, at least according to Henry Wilhelm. Regards, Roger Smith
RE: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus
While it indeed may be more sensible for the ISP to maintain a virus checking operation on all messages coming into and going out of their ISP, your ISP also, evidently, seems to work under the assumption that redundancy insures that the message will get through and sends out multiple copies of your posts. :-) I received several copies of the post below. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mark Otway Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 7:50 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus Perhaps we should all suggest to our service providers that they should impliment a similar scheme. The ISP that hosts my website and provides my mail has a virus-checker running on the pop and smtp servers. This means that I *cannot* receive a virus, and if I accidently catch one it can't be sent either. He keeps the virus-checker totally up to date. That's much more sensible than just blocking certain types of attachments. I don't run any anti-virus software, and in 6 years of regular internet use I've never had a virus. Not once. Mark http://www.otway.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan - film types
I would go the Advanced Workflow Suggestions route and lock in the film color, using White Balance. Maris - Original Message - From: P Elkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:44 AM Subject: filmscanners: Vuescan - film types | I rely on the film profiles in Vuescan to get me somewhere near accurate | colours when scanning colour neg, especially as I am partially colour blind. | However I have had some trouble recently using Fuji Superia 400, S-400. I am | finding the Super G 400 G2 profile is quite cold and I am having to use the | Neutral setting instead of White Balance but it is often too warm! I have | tried to scan the film base but with no success - it just ends up being a | grain filled blue/yellow mess - I was hoping to do my own profile and lock | the colour. | | Any guidance or advice would be much appreciated. | | Philip Elkin | |
Re: filmscanners: Filmscanners: OT: E-mail virus
Perhaps we should all suggest to our service providers that they should impliment a similar scheme. The ISP that hosts my website and provides my mail has a virus-checker running on the pop and smtp servers. This means that I *cannot* receive a virus, and if I accidently catch one it can't be sent either. He keeps the virus-checker totally up to date. That's much more sensible than just blocking certain types of attachments. I don't run any anti-virus software, and in 6 years of regular internet use I've never had a virus. Not once. Well, you're playing an online form of Russian Roulette then. Some of the recent rash of viruses attach themselves to web pages. Click on the right link, and you're hit! And, you probably won't know about it until for some time. Unless of course, the virus trashes your system.
filmscanners: VueScan 7.3.2 Available
I just released VueScan 7.3.2 for Windows, Mac OS 8/9/X and Linux. It can be downloaded from: http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html What's new in version 7.3.2 * Added support for RGB exposure on some Epson scanners * Fixed problem when changing window size * Fixed problem using APS adapter on Canon FS4000 * Fixed problem with SCSI on some Mac OS X systems Regards, Ed Hamrick
filmscanners: Monochrome film speed/developer calibration for scanning?
Hi all, I was reading the book Perfect Exposure today (Hicks Schultz) and read the section on film testing. Struck me that for people like myself who have got rid of the wet darkroom, a method of calibrating a personal film speed and developer should be developed around scanning negs. What it suggested for a simple test was that you shoot some frames with black velvet, an 18% grey card and a sheet of matt photographic paper (fixed and washed) bracketed around your meter reading. Then: the white paper should be detectable lighter than a piece of fogged and developed film, and the black velvet should be a good bit darker than the film base plus fog. If you have a densitometer, you can take actual readings. The black velvet should be at least 0.10 log units darker than fb+f and the white paper should have a density of around 1.1 Now ideally I see a piece of software scan in a blank frame to get the fb+f value, and a totally overexposed frame to get a maximum density value. At that point a frame of the velvet/18%/paper can be scanned in and some small target areas of each tone identified. The software can then scan in the rest of the frames and determine which one has the greatest contrast without flushing out either end. Another test could quantify the 'grainyness' of each patch by examining the distribution of values in the area, so different developers or under/overdevelopment could be studied When the best patch has been identified the 18% grey section could be used for rudimentary gamma curveĀ . Or even better, shoot one of those Kodak 20 odd step monochrome grey scales in the image to get a more accurate version. I imagine auto-exposure on the scanner could be a problem with this. Any comments? Regards Ned _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Rescans and archiving
Roger wrote: At 11:26 PM +1000 12/12/01, Rob Geraghty wrote: The archival nature of Kodachrome is awesome. It's a shame that the technology is being displaced by ektachrome in that respect. However I believe the modern Ektachrome films are much more archival than earlier versions. Yes, that is true, but they still don't match the Fujichromes for longevity, at least according to Henry Wilhelm. Hi Roger - when I spoke of Ektachrome, I meant *all* ektachrome films, which includes Fuji and all other brands which use the ektachrome process. It's reassuring to know that Wilhelm says Fuji films have good longevity since almost my entire collection is fuji film. However, Fuji film simply wasn't around just post WWII, but I've seen Kodachromes that still look brilliant from QEII's coronation. I really hope that Fuji films do turn out to last a long time, but at the moment the only one we can be sure of is Kodachrome. But note I'm shooting Fuji because I like the colour and other aspects of the films. :) If I was really paranoid about longevity, I'd probably shoot kodachrome. As was mentioned before, all this depends on how well they're stored etc. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Prime Film Scanner1800u
At 21:51 11/12/01 -0800, you wrote: I downloaded several full size but JPEGED samples from the first link below. the other at 2386 x 1638 pixels is only 1.1 meg, so obviously they have been heavily compressed. Even so, the 1.1 meg image doesn't look too bad. As a matter of possible (?) interest that's about the same size and pixel count as the JPEG files my 3.3 MP Casio 3000 canera produces. I print them to A3 no sweat. I even print them to A2 which shouldn't work in terms of dot count. If only I could train my eyes to recognise these as obviously overdone . :-) Ian B
Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Rescans and archiving
Rob Geraghty wrote: Roger wrote: At 11:26 PM +1000 12/12/01, Rob Geraghty wrote: The archival nature of Kodachrome is awesome. It's a shame that the technology is being displaced by ektachrome in that respect. However I believe the modern Ektachrome films are much more archival than earlier versions. Yes, that is true, but they still don't match the Fujichromes for longevity, at least according to Henry Wilhelm. Hi Roger - when I spoke of Ektachrome, I meant *all* ektachrome films, which includes Fuji and all other brands which use the ektachrome process. It's reassuring to know that Wilhelm says Fuji films have good longevity since almost my entire collection is fuji film. However, Fuji film simply wasn't around just post WWII, but I've seen Kodachromes that still look brilliant from QEII's coronation. I really hope that Fuji films do turn out to last a long time, but at the moment the only one we can be sure of is Kodachrome. Fuji's Velvia chrome film is the most stable of the Fuji chrome films (significantly more stable than the rest). I think that's he only one that is more stable than Kodak Ecktachrome...But my knowledge is a few years old. Harvey Ferdschneider partner, SKID Photography, NYC
Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.3.2 Available
salut Ed, one question: What's new in version 7.3.2 * Added support for RGB exposure on some Epson scanners also on the epson expression 1600 pro? And I am very HAPPY with the again separated preview and scan window (suggestion: can they be made detachable so you can drag them to another monitor? Also i am still wishing some better control of white and BP: a histogram? Please! Please?) thanks a lot jan albrecht
filmscanners: LS-2000 B/W Negatives
Has anyone find a satisfactory solution to scanning BW negatives using the LS-2000? Is there any hope that this could be made to work? Thanks Gaspar
