[filmscanners] RE: Building PC system for image editing
No Richard. I'm aware about Macs, however, their market is very narrow here in Israel making them significantly more expensive then comparable PC and there will be additional hassles of figuring out sotware for them. Regards, Alex Z -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 4:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing Have you considered the Apple route at all? Richard Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Building PC system for image editing
Ezio's other advice was good. However, I have to disagree here. Win 98 and ME are utter garbage. Win 2000 or XP are vastly better and are real 32-bit, protected memory, multi-tasking operating systems and are vastly more stable than 98 or ME. If drivers don't exist for a piece of hardware and Win 2000, don't use the hardware. The manufacturer isn't providing good support if they haven't come up with drivers yet. Photoshop will be vastly more stable under 2000. Paul Wilson > -Original Message- > From: Ezio c/o TIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 7:34 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing > > > I have forgot ! ... OPERATING SYSTEM = WINDOWS 98 SE > No other choices to avoid headaches with drivers ! > > Sincerely. > > Ezio Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing
- Original Message - From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi all. I'm considering constructing myself the PC system (have previous experience doing that about 5 years ago though), however, it seems I'm out of date of the PC technology being confused by the choices of the parts. I rely on the List helping me out to clarify that and to understand what really I need. 1. Memory. I understand this is the most important resource for image processing. I'm planning to start from 512 MB right from the beginning, however the DRAM types seem to be overwhelming: SDRAM, DDR, RDRAM, DDR ECC (not talking about EDO which are probably out of questions though). I'm familiar with SDRAM technology, but others sounds to be quite new and unknown (for me, at least). I paid attention the DDR and RDRAM types are considerably more expensive then SDRAM. The question is whether this is really justified ? It can be if you choose a fast motherboard to match. DDR-SDRAm matched with say an EPoX 8KHA+ is inexpensive and will do plenty of speed. What is the benefits of those DDR and RDRAM against SDRAM ? About 5% speed increase or so. Will I gain real life performance with those new types compared to SDRAM ? If carefully matched with parts that can use the performance, yes. Finally, your opinion about DDR/RDRAM price/performance compared to SDRAM (let's say SDRAM 133 MHz) ? RDRAM is still the price leader with less of a speed bump to justify the cost. When I bought my DDR-SDRAM, the SDRAAM was only pennies less. Prices are on the way back up since the end of November. 2. Processor. I think I would opt for something like P4 1.6-1.7 GHz which sounds to be enough given there will be no serious constraints on the memory amount. What about AMD Ahtlon ? Bang for the buck would be an Athlon 1800+. If money is no object, then go for the Athlon 2000+. If the Intel name means something special to you, then go for the 1.4 mHz PIII. The lastest 0.13 die P4 is worth looking at if you can spit gold. 3. As about HDD I think there is no too much choices to contemplate about. The bigger, faster and reliable is better. Depends on the local market offerings. BTW, should I pay more for SCSI interface ? Only if you are doing this as a business and can write off the cost. IDE drives have caught up and passed most SCSI drives in general use. The 10,000 and 15,000 rpm SCSI drives still have an edge for large files that make them worth considering. Large capacity drives from Maxtor, Seagate, and Western Digital make IDE worth checking out. Check out the Western Digital WD1200SE as an example. What is RAID ? Any opinions about it ? RAID is a redundant array of inexpensive discs, or the combining of smaller drives to act like either one larger drive, or mirrors of the smaller drives. For home use, not worth the trouble and cost. 4. Display card. Which one would you recommend ? (not necessarily to be the most expensive though...) Go with the Matrox G550 series cards for about $129 at some places. The 360 mHz RAMDAC in these cardss give the best 2D imaging on the consumer market. The older G450 is just as good, but the same price at most places. ALso has excellent 2nd monitor connectivity for, say, a proofing monitor, or menus monitor. 5. CD-RW. Are there DVD-RW available for PC installation ? Drives exist with DVD-RAM, DVD-RW, and DVD+RW that are worth the expense if you are archiving large numbers of images. Check out Philips' DVD+RW offering, or HP's. Are they worth the expense ? YMMV. Jim Snyder Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Defective Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II: update :-((
In a message dated 1/12/2002 7:34:24 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Incidentally, it doesn't look like the current support for the scanner in > the latest version of Vuescan incorporates calibration routines. Minolta mailed me a loaner Scan Elite II on Friday. I expect to get this working by next Friday. Regards, Ed Hamrick Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: VueScan Suggestions Needed
Yep, I'm happy bringing a flat hi-bit Vuescan into PS to do final color/tone correction. I set up Vuescan to get all the tones the scanner can get, and then I use the shift up/down arrow trick to dial in the final correction. It's very helpful and shows you where things are at quickly. I also like to use the color balance feature using the shift up/down technique. I start with shadows and try up and down on every color, then highlights, and last midtones. With a calibrated monitor this shows quickly where corrections may still be needed, and then if you want you can implement what you've just learned with a curve and still protect highlight detail. The interesting thing is a hi-bit Vuescan with final corrections in Photoshop is a better starting point than any other scan driver I've used in terms of natural color and accuracy. Something about the intrinsic accuracy of Vuescan? Dave - Original Message - From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 9:38 AM Subject: [filmscanners] RE: VueScan Suggestions Needed The Photoshop approach is addictive: up/down arrow increments by one "unit" shift held down at the same time increments by 10 "units". mouse-wheel up down is synonymous with up/down arrow (sorry Mac users, you're *really* missing out with no wheel on your mouse...) Sliders become much less interesting, then. They can retain their function as "gross" manipulators. Jawed Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: SprintScan 4000
Great info, thanks to all. John Rossi http://www.inksupply.com Great prices, good quality, and usually fast shipping, even if the email service is slow from time to time. James Hill Freelance Photographer Mebane, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "John Rossi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Tips needed on difficult scan
- Original Message - From: Julian Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 11:52 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Tips needed on difficult scan Being endlessly interested in contrast taming, I just tried this but obviously I am missing something because I can't get it to work. I certainly don't understand how it works, mostly because I don't know what "screen" does :( Is the technique assuming the dark or light image on top, or doesn't it matter? It does remind me though of the other semi-automatic way of improving high contrast images which works quite well, although if overused gives some strange effects on the light-dark transitions and at the edge of image. Contrast masking... - Image needs to be in 8-bit which is a shame. - duplicate it into a second layer - desaturate top layer and invert (make it a negative of itself) - select OVERLAY as mode - gaussian blur this top layer to 20-70pixels until you get the best effect - reduce the effect if necessary by reducing transparency of top layer Julian I love this technique for contrasty chromes (never need it for negs with Vuescan), but I question the need for the gaussian blur part. The digital "contrast mask" is an exact pixel for pixel overlay, and old school film contrast masks were made "out of focus" to compensate for dimensional instability between film and mask layers not an issue with digital. So another way to do this is no blur and much lower transparency on CRM layer. 20 to 40 percent is all you can do without a blur, but IMO looks better than using blur. The contrast reducing effect moves faster but with more precision in final result. Dave Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: SprintScan 4000
Looks like the slide/negative holders have been covered. For ink I would choose www.atlex.com for any Epson OEM product, inks or paper. Good prices, great selection, usually fast service. I use MIS Lightfast inks, which are Epson OEM equivalents (actually a little better), in a bulk system and love them. http://www.inksupply.com Great prices, good quality, and usually fast shipping, even if the email service is slow from time to time. James Hill Freelance Photographer Mebane, NC [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "John Rossi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Archive??
"Web archives for this list may be found at :- http://www.mail-archive.com/filmscanners@halftone.co.uk http://phi.res.cse.dmu.ac.uk/Filmscan/ Regards Tony Sleep" Maris - Original Message - From: "Dawn Campbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 8:37 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Archive?? This question has probably been asked a billion times before, but is there an archive for this group. I look at Tony Sleep's site and couldn't see any evidence of one. Rather than bore the group with the typical questions posed every week, I thought I'd try to educate myself a little first. I just got VueScan and Silverfast, and am working my way thru Vuescan, but am a bit confused about some of the default settings and why they are set the way they are. Thanks, Dawn Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Archive??
This question has probably been asked a billion times before, but is there an archive for this group. I look at Tony Sleep's site and couldn't see any evidence of one. Rather than bore the group with the typical questions posed every week, I thought I'd try to educate myself a little first. I just got VueScan and Silverfast, and am working my way thru Vuescan, but am a bit confused about some of the default settings and why they are set the way they are. Thanks, Dawn Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing
Have you considered the Apple route at all? Richard Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Anyone using Epson 2450 Photo, Mac + Vuescan?
On 13/1/02 1:18 am, "Ralf Schmode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: > >> I've just got an Elite II and have been checking the deep shadows for >> issues, particularly the red channel banding. I have noticed something >> very odd. A straight scan (with or without ICE) shows red channel >> banding identical to what Ralf got along with some "telephone wires". >> However, when GEM is enabled, the banding pretty well disappears. >> And it also looks like some of the the other CCD anomalies like the >> "telephone wires" also improve or disappear. > > Hi again, > > with my defective Elite II I used GEM once at the default value of 50. I > hadn't noticed the banding then, so I can't tell whether it was present > or not, but at the value of 50 I noticed *huge* "averaging" of the > colors, just a bit like Gaussian blur would cause it. That softening > effect may well have evened out the banding. > >> This seems to suggest that the banding (or lack of it with GEM) is not >> caused by any change in scanning speed (or anything else mechanical) >> but by a glitch in the calibration, which doesn't occur with GEM. Or >> alternatively, the algorithms in GEM are just good at cleaning up these >> sort of deep shadow problems.. > > You may find out by using GEM at a very low value (1 instead of the > default 50). If it is the cleaning effect of GEM, a value of 1 should > leave more of the banding than a value of 50. If it is just a matter of > the calibration data being re-written, the banding should be gone even > at a value of 1 (which I doubt will remove any grain at all). > >> I suspect the issue is faulty calibration by the software (maybe made >> worse by poor QC) rather than it being purely hardware. Could well be >> good hardware let down by buggy software or firmware. > > I may be mistaken but as far as I know *every* CCD unit would be > "faulty" in the sense of showing off "telephone wires" without prior > calibration. What I am not sure of is, for example, if a single CCD > pixel lost "efficiency" in the sense of electrical response to light > exposition (as a result of aging, dirt, you name it), whether or not the > Minolta Software would be able to correct this properly. > >> I haven't reached any conclusions yet whether what I've seen will >> constitute real problems in normal scans. Certainly, using GEM and x4 >> multiscanning on one of my (underexposed) slides I use as a test and >> pulling up the shadows, the result was far better than my old Elite. > > If GEM, at a low setting that does not affect the overall appearance of > a picture, would be able to completely remedy the banding/"telephone > wire" issue, this might be a way out. I'll hopefully be able to try for > myself next week. If the price for getting rid of the banding is having > the image dramatically softened due to a high GEM setting, there will be > another Elite II on its way back to Minolta, and a Nikon LS-40 will take > its place :-)) > >> Incidentally, it doesn't look like the current support for the scanner in >> the latest version of Vuescan incorporates calibration routines. Pity >> really, as this would help clarify whether the hardware or the Minolta >> software is the issue. Anyone using Epson 2450 Photo, Mac + Vuescan? I'm having a problem getting Vuescan to see the device. Thanks Richard Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Defective Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II: update :-((
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: > I've just got an Elite II and have been checking the deep shadows for > issues, particularly the red channel banding. I have noticed something > very odd. A straight scan (with or without ICE) shows red channel > banding identical to what Ralf got along with some "telephone wires". > However, when GEM is enabled, the banding pretty well disappears. > And it also looks like some of the the other CCD anomalies like the > "telephone wires" also improve or disappear. Hi again, with my defective Elite II I used GEM once at the default value of 50. I hadn't noticed the banding then, so I can't tell whether it was present or not, but at the value of 50 I noticed *huge* "averaging" of the colors, just a bit like Gaussian blur would cause it. That softening effect may well have evened out the banding. > This seems to suggest that the banding (or lack of it with GEM) is not > caused by any change in scanning speed (or anything else mechanical) > but by a glitch in the calibration, which doesn't occur with GEM. Or > alternatively, the algorithms in GEM are just good at cleaning up these > sort of deep shadow problems.. You may find out by using GEM at a very low value (1 instead of the default 50). If it is the cleaning effect of GEM, a value of 1 should leave more of the banding than a value of 50. If it is just a matter of the calibration data being re-written, the banding should be gone even at a value of 1 (which I doubt will remove any grain at all). > I suspect the issue is faulty calibration by the software (maybe made > worse by poor QC) rather than it being purely hardware. Could well be > good hardware let down by buggy software or firmware. I may be mistaken but as far as I know *every* CCD unit would be "faulty" in the sense of showing off "telephone wires" without prior calibration. What I am not sure of is, for example, if a single CCD pixel lost "efficiency" in the sense of electrical response to light exposition (as a result of aging, dirt, you name it), whether or not the Minolta Software would be able to correct this properly. > I haven't reached any conclusions yet whether what I've seen will > constitute real problems in normal scans. Certainly, using GEM and x4 > multiscanning on one of my (underexposed) slides I use as a test and > pulling up the shadows, the result was far better than my old Elite. If GEM, at a low setting that does not affect the overall appearance of a picture, would be able to completely remedy the banding/"telephone wire" issue, this might be a way out. I'll hopefully be able to try for myself next week. If the price for getting rid of the banding is having the image dramatically softened due to a high GEM setting, there will be another Elite II on its way back to Minolta, and a Nikon LS-40 will take its place :-)) > Incidentally, it doesn't look like the current support for the scanner in > the latest version of Vuescan incorporates calibration routines. Pity > really, as this would help clarify whether the hardware or the Minolta > software is the issue. But it would be interesting if the banding issue exists at all with Vuescan. If Vuescan has the functionality of getting at least a raw scan out of the Elite II, I'd be most interested in the results regarding the problems discussed. So long - Ralf -- My animal photo page on the WWW: http://schmode.net Find my PGP keys (RSA and DSS/DH) on PGP key servers (use "TrustCenter" certified keys only) Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing
I have forgot ! ... OPERATING SYSTEM = WINDOWS 98 SE No other choices to avoid headaches with drivers ! Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site ICQ: 139507382 - Original Message - From: "Ezio c/o TIN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 1:01 AM Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing Alex ... first of all you will find as many opinion about the best as many users you will contact ;o) ... he he he ! Second ... I have developped my OPTIMAL SYSTEM in the past 12 years of self assembling ... all my friends have systems builded by myself ... and in house I have 3 systems interconnected (mainly used by kids to play video games and myself to play with digital imaging and digital audio). 1. Memory. I understand this is the most important resource for image processing. I'm planning to start from 512 MB Well done ! ... that is barely enough ... for scanning purposes . In facts 2700dpi from a film are almost 30MB ... multiplied many times (as Photoshop does ... ) + other system stuff = 256 MB + some room for the ease . 2. Processor. I think I would opt for something like P4 1.6-1.7 GHz which sounds to be enough given there will be no serious constraints on the memory amount. What about AMD Ahtlon ? I strongly push for AMD processors ... I have those ONLY at home (3 systems) and no problems nor with Photoshop and neither with Wavelab by Steinberg neither with the most demanding and intriguing video games very cheap , very fast , very powerful and very stable ON APPRPRIATE MOTHERBOARD !!! be careful only few vendors of MB are ... STABLE ... I suggest ASUS A7V266 coupled with AMD 1.7GHz (PIII clone and more) 3. As about HDD I think there is no too much choices to contemplate about. The bigger, faster and reliable is better. Depends on the local market offerings. BTW, should I pay more for SCSI interface ? What is RAID ? Any opinions about it ? SCSI U-160 for SURE ... and lately there are on eBay good auctions for SCSI RAID boards available for 50$ (I've bought a couple of them!!! ... MYLEX ACCELERAID 250 ) SCSI because it's FASTER and working with many I/O at the same time IT IS NOT MORE EXPENSIVE as you think ... I have already bought (for my new system ) 4 x IBM SCSI-3 18GB 1rpm 4MB cache at 90$ EACH !!! under IBM warranty (3 years) sealed packs on eBay of course ! IDE is good for CD-R ... quite good ... because you will have troubles to find CD-Rs SCSI these days ... and in this case the SCSI devices are owfully more expensive than IDE ... so TAKE IDE for SLOW devices to SAVE on the total system budget. 4. Display card. Which one would you recommend ? (not necessarily to be the most expensive though...) Take a GTS2 nVidia today available at less than 150$ (64MB DDR) ... I use an ELSA 64MB DDR GTS2 since 2 years ago and today are available GTS3 but they cost 500$ list and 300$ on eBay ... abd such a power is required by gaming only not by Photoshop ! 5. CD-RW. Are there DVD-RW available for PC installation ? Are they worth the expense ? I use 2 x MITSUMI 8x4x24 2 years old ... I have burnt more than 1,000 CD-Rs flawless (I have told you I am playing with music ! ... ) they costed 2 years ago 120$ each and are good as the much more expensive Plextor , TDK or other ! ... CD-Rs are required for archiving purposes and almost compulsory . I suggest MITSUMI (the new models ) on eBay (they have a lousy distribution and thus are easier and cheaper to find on eBay ) many other available , but DO NOT BUDGET more than 150$ each ... they are just like those expensive. Put them IDE not to slow down your SCSI chain and not to spend a fortune ! SCSI board CHEAP ! to attach the scanners ... must be added. 2904 or similar by ADAPTEC (I have a 2940 I have paid 150$ 3 years ago ... but there are available 2940UW2 on eBay for less than 200$. This is almost the system I would build for a friend I cannot say it is the fastest , but I am almost sure it is among the best as price/performance ratio. Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site ICQ: 139507382 - Original Message - From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Defective Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II: update :-((
Ralf Schmode wrote: > as you may remember, I addressed this list two weeks ago because my > freshly delivered Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II turned out to be > defective right out of the box (banding and "telephone wires", see > http://schmode.net/banding_channels.jpg for details). I've just got an Elite II and have been checking the deep shadows for issues, particularly the red channel banding. I have noticed something very odd. A straight scan (with or without ICE) shows red channel banding identical to what Ralf got along with some "telephone wires". However, when GEM is enabled, the banding pretty well disappears. And it also looks like some of the the other CCD anomalies like the "telephone wires" also improve or disappear. As far as I can tell, the Minolta implementation of GEM writes the whole scan to the hard disk and then manipulates the file to generating the final version. The whole process obviously takes longer than a straight scan but the actual scanning speed within it looks much the same. Also, when GEM or ICE are switched on or off, some of the calibration files (in particular "dark.bin") are updated as part of the preview process. (The software generates 4 white and black point calibration files when it first connects to the scanner, plus a 5th for IR once ICE is switched on.) The disappearance or reappearance of any "telephone wires" anomalies seems to co-incide with any updating of these files. This seems to suggest that the banding (or lack of it with GEM) is not caused by any change in scanning speed (or anything else mechanical) but by a glitch in the calibration, which doesn't occur with GEM. Or alternatively, the algorithms in GEM are just good at cleaning up these sort of deep shadow problems.. I suspect the issue is faulty calibration by the software (maybe made worse by poor QC) rather than it being purely hardware. Could well be good hardware let down by buggy software or firmware. I haven't reached any conclusions yet whether what I've seen will constitute real problems in normal scans. Certainly, using GEM and x4 multiscanning on one of my (underexposed) slides I use as a test and pulling up the shadows, the result was far better than my old Elite. Now all I need to do is work out the particular workflow and combination of settings which give consistent and equally good results :) Incidentally, it doesn't look like the current support for the scanner in the latest version of Vuescan incorporates calibration routines. Pity really, as this would help clarify whether the hardware or the Minolta software is the issue. Al Bond Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Building PC system for image editing
Alex ... first of all you will find as many opinion about the best as many users you will contact ;o) ... he he he ! Second ... I have developped my OPTIMAL SYSTEM in the past 12 years of self assembling ... all my friends have systems builded by myself ... and in house I have 3 systems interconnected (mainly used by kids to play video games and myself to play with digital imaging and digital audio). 1. Memory. I understand this is the most important resource for image processing. I'm planning to start from 512 MB Well done ! ... that is barely enough ... for scanning purposes . In facts 2700dpi from a film are almost 30MB ... multiplied many times (as Photoshop does ... ) + other system stuff = 256 MB + some room for the ease . 2. Processor. I think I would opt for something like P4 1.6-1.7 GHz which sounds to be enough given there will be no serious constraints on the memory amount. What about AMD Ahtlon ? I strongly push for AMD processors ... I have those ONLY at home (3 systems) and no problems nor with Photoshop and neither with Wavelab by Steinberg neither with the most demanding and intriguing video games very cheap , very fast , very powerful and very stable ON APPRPRIATE MOTHERBOARD !!! be careful only few vendors of MB are ... STABLE ... I suggest ASUS A7V266 coupled with AMD 1.7GHz (PIII clone and more) 3. As about HDD I think there is no too much choices to contemplate about. The bigger, faster and reliable is better. Depends on the local market offerings. BTW, should I pay more for SCSI interface ? What is RAID ? Any opinions about it ? SCSI U-160 for SURE ... and lately there are on eBay good auctions for SCSI RAID boards available for 50$ (I've bought a couple of them!!! ... MYLEX ACCELERAID 250 ) SCSI because it's FASTER and working with many I/O at the same time IT IS NOT MORE EXPENSIVE as you think ... I have already bought (for my new system ) 4 x IBM SCSI-3 18GB 1rpm 4MB cache at 90$ EACH !!! under IBM warranty (3 years) sealed packs on eBay of course ! IDE is good for CD-R ... quite good ... because you will have troubles to find CD-Rs SCSI these days ... and in this case the SCSI devices are owfully more expensive than IDE ... so TAKE IDE for SLOW devices to SAVE on the total system budget. 4. Display card. Which one would you recommend ? (not necessarily to be the most expensive though...) Take a GTS2 nVidia today available at less than 150$ (64MB DDR) ... I use an ELSA 64MB DDR GTS2 since 2 years ago and today are available GTS3 but they cost 500$ list and 300$ on eBay ... abd such a power is required by gaming only not by Photoshop ! 5. CD-RW. Are there DVD-RW available for PC installation ? Are they worth the expense ? I use 2 x MITSUMI 8x4x24 2 years old ... I have burnt more than 1,000 CD-Rs flawless (I have told you I am playing with music ! ... ) they costed 2 years ago 120$ each and are good as the much more expensive Plextor , TDK or other ! ... CD-Rs are required for archiving purposes and almost compulsory . I suggest MITSUMI (the new models ) on eBay (they have a lousy distribution and thus are easier and cheaper to find on eBay ) many other available , but DO NOT BUDGET more than 150$ each ... they are just like those expensive. Put them IDE not to slow down your SCSI chain and not to spend a fortune ! SCSI board CHEAP ! to attach the scanners ... must be added. 2904 or similar by ADAPTEC (I have a 2940 I have paid 150$ 3 years ago ... but there are available 2940UW2 on eBay for less than 200$. This is almost the system I would build for a friend I cannot say it is the fastest , but I am almost sure it is among the best as price/performance ratio. Sincerely. Ezio www.lucenti.com e-photography site ICQ: 139507382 - Original Message - From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Building PC system for image editing
I built the PC I use to scan and run Photoshop. It's a dual PIII 866 with 1.25G, two 18G SCSI drives and so forth running Win2K. I don't have experience with faster P4's but I really like dual processors and SCSI. Why? Because I'm writing this email while my scanner is going and both processors are at 65% or so. Dual PIII motherboards are cheap and PIII 1G processors only cost $135 or so. You can build a dual AMD machine also but I have my doubts about the stability. http://www.2cpu.com has some good info. As for RAM, they type you need will pretty much be dictated by the processor and motherboard you choose. All PIII's use SDRAM, most P4's use RDRAM though some now use SDRAM (SDRAM is cheaper) and AMD's use DDR. I doubt the type of RAM will have as much of an effect on system performance as the type of processor and the amount of RAM. One problem with P4's and RDRAM is that the memory has to be installed in matched pairs. For example, you'll need 2 256MB sticks and 2 512MB sticks if you want 1.5G or RAM. SDRAM can be mixed in any combination. Hard drive: As I said I have SCSI which is nice but it's more money. SCSI offloads the IO processing from the CPU which is nice as it makes the machine more responsive. However, the new ATA100 7200rpm IDE drives are nice and perform very well. I'll let someone else discuss the benefits of RAID. Paul Wilson PS. Get a good case. The case will probably outlast the rest of the components and a good one will make installation much easier. I got one of these: http://www.antec-inc.com/product/cases/sohoser.html > -Original Message- > From: Alex Zabrovsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Building PC system for image editing > > > Hi all. > Preparing to acquire IV ED within few weeks I've started to > consider the PC > system to handle post-processing and image achivating. > Currently my regular system is quite old Compaq laptop running on > 333 MHz Celeron + 192 MB memory. I realize that it will be > probably quite > hard - nearly impossible to run image editing software on 35 MB files > expecting for reasonable performance from that machine, however > laptop can still be used as scanner's host for download. > > I'm considering constructing myself the PC system (have > previous experience > doing that about 5 years ago though), however, it seems I'm > out of date of the PC technology being confused by the > choices of the parts. > I rely on the List helping me out to clarify that and to > understand what > really I need. > > 1. Memory. I understand this is the most important resource for image > processing. I'm planning to start from 512 MB right from the > beginning, > however the DRAM types seem to be overwhelming: SDRAM, DDR, RDRAM, > DDR ECC (not talking about EDO which are probably out of > questions though). > I'm familiar with SDRAM technology, but others sounds to be > quite new and unknown (for me, at least). > I paid attention the DDR and RDRAM types are considerably > more expensive > then SDRAM. > The question is whether this is really justified ? > What is the benefits of those DDR and RDRAM against SDRAM ? > Will I gain real life performance with those new types > compared to SDRAM ? > Finally, your opinion about DDR/RDRAM price/performance > compared to SDRAM > (let's say SDRAM 133 MHz) ? > > 2. Processor. I think I would opt for something like P4 1.6-1.7 GHz > which sounds to be enough given there will be no serious > constraints on the > memory amount. What about AMD Ahtlon ? > > 3. As about HDD I think there is no too much choices to > contemplate about. >The bigger, faster and reliable is better. Depends on the > local market > offerings. BTW, should I pay more for SCSI interface ? > What is RAID ? Any opinions about it ? > > 4. Display card. Which one would you recommend ? (not > necessarily to be the > most expensive though...) > > 5. CD-RW. Are there DVD-RW available for PC installation ? >Are they worth the expense ? > > Well, other parts are non-brainers which doesn't really > relates to image > processing performance, so I'll not clatter the query by those. > > Would really appreciate any responses with clarifications. > Links to the helpful sites are welcome as well. > > > Regards, > Alex Z > > -- > -- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with > 'unsubscribe filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the > message title or body > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Building PC system for image editing
Hi all. Preparing to acquire IV ED within few weeks I've started to consider the PC system to handle post-processing and image achivating. Currently my regular system is quite old Compaq laptop running on 333 MHz Celeron + 192 MB memory. I realize that it will be probably quite hard - nearly impossible to run image editing software on 35 MB files expecting for reasonable performance from that machine, however laptop can still be used as scanner's host for download. I'm considering constructing myself the PC system (have previous experience doing that about 5 years ago though), however, it seems I'm out of date of the PC technology being confused by the choices of the parts. I rely on the List helping me out to clarify that and to understand what really I need. 1. Memory. I understand this is the most important resource for image processing. I'm planning to start from 512 MB right from the beginning, however the DRAM types seem to be overwhelming: SDRAM, DDR, RDRAM, DDR ECC (not talking about EDO which are probably out of questions though). I'm familiar with SDRAM technology, but others sounds to be quite new and unknown (for me, at least). I paid attention the DDR and RDRAM types are considerably more expensive then SDRAM. The question is whether this is really justified ? What is the benefits of those DDR and RDRAM against SDRAM ? Will I gain real life performance with those new types compared to SDRAM ? Finally, your opinion about DDR/RDRAM price/performance compared to SDRAM (let's say SDRAM 133 MHz) ? 2. Processor. I think I would opt for something like P4 1.6-1.7 GHz which sounds to be enough given there will be no serious constraints on the memory amount. What about AMD Ahtlon ? 3. As about HDD I think there is no too much choices to contemplate about. The bigger, faster and reliable is better. Depends on the local market offerings. BTW, should I pay more for SCSI interface ? What is RAID ? Any opinions about it ? 4. Display card. Which one would you recommend ? (not necessarily to be the most expensive though...) 5. CD-RW. Are there DVD-RW available for PC installation ? Are they worth the expense ? Well, other parts are non-brainers which doesn't really relates to image processing performance, so I'll not clatter the query by those. Would really appreciate any responses with clarifications. Links to the helpful sites are welcome as well. Regards, Alex Z Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: SprintScan 4000
FYI, The last 128 SS4000 will be here in a day or two. I will try to find out who to have been allocated too. David -Original Message- From: Winsor Crosby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 12:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[filmscanners] Re: SprintScan 4000 >Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting >delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all >appear at once. > >Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional >slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and >e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders >(already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). >Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have >backups. >On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and >third party? Thanks, John Rossi > A couple of days ago I was looking for the scanner for someone and did a query on google and some of the comparative shopping search engines for SprintScan 4000 and all I found were left over holders. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] LS 4000 Green Cast
I recently purchased a Nikon Supercoolscan 4000. I am using Nikon Scan 3.1.5 on a mac with OS 9.1. The film I use is Provia or Velvia. I also tried an Ektachrome slide. All of my pre-scans and scans have an extreme green cast, to the point that all other colors are obliterated. I had the scame scanner 6 months ago and did not experience this problem. This problem does not occur with negatives. Using Vuescan, I was able to get perfect scans. But, I¹d like to get Nikon Scan to work as I believe that there are some instances where I may wish to use all of the features of Digital Gem and Ice, and Roc. I¹ve been working at getting help from Nikon Tech-support. After many hours, turning off color controls and various settings, the tech support person told me I'd have to go for help with "the big boys upstairs." After many more hours, I got ³upstairs.² But so far no solution. They had me send in one of my green slides. They say that one possibility is that a ³few of the red or blue LED elements are not firing.² Thinking in terms of a hardware problem, they may want me to send them the scanner. But, if the scanner works with Vuescan, the hardware must be OK. They are supposed to get back to me on Monday. Anyone have any suggestions? Martin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Sprintscan 4000 Slide holder status
Polaroid has on order since December 500 SS4000 slide holders. I am trying to get the status of this order and will advise. David Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: SprintScan 4000
>Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting >delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all >appear at once. > >Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional >slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and >e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders >(already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). >Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have >backups. >On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and >third party? Thanks, John Rossi > A couple of days ago I was looking for the scanner for someone and did a query on google and some of the comparative shopping search engines for SprintScan 4000 and all I found were left over holders. -- Winsor Crosby Long Beach, California Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: SprintScan 4000
Try Microtek..their 4000T uses the SAME holders.. Eddie wiseman - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 11:29 AM Subject: [filmscanners] RE: SprintScan 4000 Greetings! I am in the same boat that you are. One of the arms on my SS4000 slide holder is cracked and not amenable to repair with super glue. As you have found, none of the major retail sources seem to have replacements in stock. I have communicated with several people, including David Hemingway, who frequents this list, and Polaroid Customer Service about slide and negative holders for the SS4000. Here's what I know at this point: 1) SS4000 Slide holders were out of stock at Polaroid as of last Tuesday. Negative holders were in stock. 2) The SS4000 Plus uses the same slide and negative holders as the SS4000, so, at some point, slide holders should be available. 3) There seems to be a certain amount of confusion at Polaroid regarding these items. When I ordered my additional negative holder, I provided the correct Polaroid PID for the SS4000 and had that confirmed back to me. When my invoice arrived, someone had changed the order to negative holders for the SS35. It took about 45 minutes on the phone with Polaroid before I found someone who could even look up the valid PID (product ID?) in the Polaroid databases. Apparently the Customer Service, Order Processing, and Tech Support databases don't talk to each other and are not synchronized. I think that I finally got things straight, but won't know for sure until my new order arrives. The SS4000 is a very nice piece of gear - I think that you will like it very much. If you don't know about Vuescan (hamrick.com), check it out. I am in the process of digitizing of several thousand family slides that go back to the 1940's, and Vuescan has simplified the process greatly! Regards, Patrick Florer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Rossi Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] SprintScan 4000 Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all appear at once. Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders (already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have backups. On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: SprintScan 4000
Greetings! I am in the same boat that you are. One of the arms on my SS4000 slide holder is cracked and not amenable to repair with super glue. As you have found, none of the major retail sources seem to have replacements in stock. I have communicated with several people, including David Hemingway, who frequents this list, and Polaroid Customer Service about slide and negative holders for the SS4000. Here's what I know at this point: 1) SS4000 Slide holders were out of stock at Polaroid as of last Tuesday. Negative holders were in stock. 2) The SS4000 Plus uses the same slide and negative holders as the SS4000, so, at some point, slide holders should be available. 3) There seems to be a certain amount of confusion at Polaroid regarding these items. When I ordered my additional negative holder, I provided the correct Polaroid PID for the SS4000 and had that confirmed back to me. When my invoice arrived, someone had changed the order to negative holders for the SS35. It took about 45 minutes on the phone with Polaroid before I found someone who could even look up the valid PID (product ID?) in the Polaroid databases. Apparently the Customer Service, Order Processing, and Tech Support databases don't talk to each other and are not synchronized. I think that I finally got things straight, but won't know for sure until my new order arrives. The SS4000 is a very nice piece of gear - I think that you will like it very much. If you don't know about Vuescan (hamrick.com), check it out. I am in the process of digitizing of several thousand family slides that go back to the 1940's, and Vuescan has simplified the process greatly! Regards, Patrick Florer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Rossi Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 8:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] SprintScan 4000 Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all appear at once. Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders (already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have backups. On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: VueScan Suggestions Needed
The latest post regarding the "LCH" mode for Nikonscan ... which, as I understand, is a color space editing mode, independent of RGB color space, reminded me to ask ... does anyone see any benefit if Vuescan were to adopt a similar "intermediate space"??? I.E., ... "raw RGB"=>"LCH"=>"final color space" I have to do my homework regarding "LCH" (... luminosity, chromacity, hue(???) ...)and its benefits, but Lab space would be another possibility ... plus, I imagine, it would be a lot of work for Ed(?) cheerios ... shAf :o) Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: SprintScan 4000
Try calling this number at Polaroid: 1-800-348-5287 ext. E068 Tom -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Rossi Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 9:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] SprintScan 4000 Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all appear at once. Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders (already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have backups. On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] SprintScan 4000
Have sent this post several times but it does not appear to be getting delivered. I assume there are still server issues. Forgive me if they all appear at once. Greetings - does anyone out there know where one might purchase additional slide holders for the Polaroid Sprintscan 4000? B&H is out of stock and e-cost does not seem to carry them. B&H does have the stripfilm holders (already ordered). My Sprintscan 4000 is in the mail (has now arrived!). Because of the shaky position of Polaroid, I feel it would be wise to have backups. On another topic - who has the best prices for Epson 1280 inks both OEM and third party? Thanks, John Rossi Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Nikon Scan question
I was wondering if I could address as simple question tot eh group about Nikon Scan, version 3.1.2. In the previous versions, the LCH editor gave access to red green and blue. In the latest version this editor is set in the lightness-hue mode. I cannot find a setting where I can return to RGB mode for this editor. Is this a possibility? thanks, Brian -- respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Defective Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II: update :-((
Hi everybody, as you may remember, I addressed this list two weeks ago because my freshly delivered Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II turned out to be defective right out of the box (banding and "telephone wires", see http://schmode.net/banding_channels.jpg for details). Here's what happened during the last two weeks regarding this issue: - Two e-mails to the Minolta staff have remained completetely unanswered. This is particularly annoying because I did not only *report* the issue but *asked* if this was a known fault, and how it should be dealt with regarding repair and/or replacement of the unit. - The latter was decided two days later when I *phoned* Minolta Germany on the issue. They decided to replace the unit but wanted to do the exchange procedure via my dealer, that is, have me send the defective unit to where I bought it. My dealer decided to have the replacement unit sent to me directly from Minolta but again this was something Minolta wasn't capable of :-( they sent it to my dealer where it should arrive today, so I'm hopeful to finally have it here by Tuesday or so. - My dealer informed me that this was the third (!) unit that had been returned to him due to quality flaws. Up to now I know of at least five Scan Elite II units. Oddly enough, none of the problems, as far as I know them, have been absolutely identical. The three faulty units I have some information of (including mine) have flaws as follows: 1. The "banding plus telephone wires" issue (my unit) 2. The "telephone lines" issue only 3. A failure in the illumination system (lamp or lamp power supply) just after the fourth (!) slide scanned. As the faults seem to be quite numerous in ratio to units sold but always (at least a little) different in appearance, I guess Minolta have a serious quality control problem. If yes, it would explain why the Minolta folks are extremely reluctant as to leaking information to those who experienced trouble with their units. As soon as the new unit is delivered, I'll be here with the latest news ;-)) See ya - Ralf -- My animal photo page on the WWW: http://schmode.net Find my PGP keys (RSA and DSS/DH) on PGP key servers (use "TrustCenter" certified keys only) Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Batch scanning with silverfast
Just a guess, but some scanners focus using contrast elements within the image. If the focus test point happens to be a very soft image area on one which has no contrsting elements within it, the scanner may be unable to find something to use as a reference to focus. Art Craig Auckland wrote: > > > I have been batch scanning 35mm slides (using the Polaroid 120) following > Ian Lyons workflow method; the system works fine except every so often a > scan is completely out of focus. I scan about 60-100 images in one lot (all > scanned to file) then open the files in Photoshop; about 3 in every 50 are > out of focus??? Anybody experienced the same? Or know why? There does not > seem to be a pattern or anything - with the out of focus slide being next to > two perfectly focused slides. > > Craig > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
