[filmscanners] LS-2000 - shadow noise banding developing

2002-03-09 Thread

Hi All

Been using my LS-2000 for a couple of years and it's been a great
workhorse - having done thousands of scans.

However, I've just started noticing VERY pronounced bands of
noise in shadow areas that streak across the image - i.e. the
same CCD cells are not performing.  It's random but about 20% of
the CCD 'cells' appear to be performing poorly.

What's worse is this is at 16x sampling which is normally very
good at limiting shadow noise.

The unit is not exposed to smoke, or in a dusty environment.
Could it just be that the CCD is getting tired?

Any one else experienced this, or have ideas??

Cheers

Rob




Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Simon Lamb

That is not so Dave.  Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps greatly.  Shadow detail, and particularly noise
in teh shadow detail, is not a software issue, it is an issue of how the
scanning light source and hardware create the noise and accentuate grain.
The depth of detail extracted from the shadow areas is not a software issue
(altough software can help) but also to do with the Dmax of the scanner.
Colour and clarity can also be assisted using Vuwscan, but the scanner has
to be able to record them reasonably accurately in the first place.

I am confident that Vuescan will not help to resolve some of these issue,
particularly edge to edge sharpness.  I use Vuescan all the time and will
try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.

Simon

Dave King wrpte:

 When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in all
 the parameters you mention except detail resolution.  I don't know how
much
 the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other scanners
 you mention can take heart in the fact that Vuescan exists.

 Dave

 - Original Message -
 From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:39 PM
 Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK


 David Lewiston wrote:

  Simon
 
  To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
 
  Just did another websearch on Imacon. At the Luminous Landscape site I
 found
  the following entry for Oct 24, 2001: At the beginning of this month
 Imacon
  announced that they had reduced the price of the Imacon Flextight Photo
to
  US$6,495 from its original price of $9,995. I have just been informed
that
  Imacon is currently offering a limited-time US$1,500 mail-in rebate
which
  effectively reduces the net cost to the end-user to $4,995.
 
  It seems to be the Flextight 1, which does 35mm only at a resolution of
  3,200 dpi, about half the resolution of its big brother.
 

 David

 It is indeed the Flextight Photo.  I used this in the dealer to scan a
35mm
 and 6x6 neg on a Sprintscan 120, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and the
 Flextight Photo.  At 3200 dpi and with a Dmax of 4.1 the Flextight blew
the
 others away with far superior scans in detail (shadow and highlight),
 clarity, colour, edge to edge sharpness etc. etc.

 I will be getting my one on Monday :-)

 Simon


 --
--
 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: cdrw drives

2002-03-09 Thread Cary Enoch R... aka Enoch's Vision, Inc.

  Speaking of off brand units...I'd heard great things
 years ago about
  Smart and Friendly.

 I have one, was top of the line about 3.5 years ago, 4x,
 SCSI. Smart and Friendly were actually a higher end
 manufacturer; good hardware.

Smart and Friendly OEM'ed their CD-RW drives from Yamaha according to
what I read a while back.

Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia
http://www.enochsvision.com  -- Behind all these manifestations is the
one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to
reveal this radiance through the created object. ~Joseph Campbell


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] unsubscribe filmscanner_digest

2002-03-09 Thread Christian Swart

unsubscribe filmscanner_digest



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Mikael Risedal

From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 11:08:16 -
Simon!
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in the mailing
list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems . I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.
Comparing  a picture from LS4000 and Imacon Photo ,  the Nikon LS 4000
picture are so inferior to the Imacon that I recommend Nikon to rebuild and
improve the scanner before they are selling this crap. Last week I did a new
scanner test who shows that  also a Minolta Elite 2 scanner at 2800ppi
outperformed my LS4000 regarding  over all sharpness.  The Minolta scanner
cost about the half price of a Nikon LS 4000 scanner. ,
Nikonscan , Silverfast  and now Vuescan allows us to decide focus point
manually. This helps a little bit against curved film problem but not 100%
The depth of field are still to short in the LS4000 and LS 2000 scanner
construction.
Some people  believes that Vuescan are doing something else that Nikonscan
or Silverfast or other scanner software's not are capable to do. All
software's are working in a similar  way regarding calculation of  a
picture. The Imacons software and scanners are outstanding regarding all
parameters and  counts to the semi or high end destop scanners leuge.The
rest are still mid end scanners.
Mikael Risedal









That is not so Dave.  Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps greatly.  Shadow detail, and particularly noise
in teh shadow detail, is not a software issue, it is an issue of how the
scanning light source and hardware create the noise and accentuate grain.
The depth of detail extracted from the shadow areas is not a software issue
(altough software can help) but also to do with the Dmax of the scanner.
Colour and clarity can also be assisted using Vuwscan, but the scanner has
to be able to record them reasonably accurately in the first place.

I am confident that Vuescan will not help to resolve some of these issue,
particularly edge to edge sharpness.  I use Vuescan all the time and will
try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.

Simon

Dave King wrpte:

  When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in
all
  the parameters you mention except detail resolution.  I don't know how
much
  the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other
scanners
  you mention can take heart in the fact that Vuescan exists.
 
  Dave
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:39 PM
  Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
 
 
  David Lewiston wrote:
 
   Simon
  
   To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
  
   Just did another websearch on Imacon. At the Luminous Landscape site I
  found
   the following entry for Oct 24, 2001: At the beginning of this month
  Imacon
   announced that they had reduced the price of the Imacon Flextight
Photo
to
   US$6,495 from its original price of $9,995. I have just been informed
that
   Imacon is currently offering a limited-time US$1,500 mail-in rebate
which
   effectively reduces the net cost to the end-user to $4,995.
  
   It seems to be the Flextight 1, which does 35mm only at a resolution
of
   3,200 dpi, about half the resolution of its big brother.
  
 
  David
 
  It is indeed the Flextight Photo.  I used this in the dealer to scan a
35mm
  and 6x6 neg on a Sprintscan 120, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and the
  Flextight Photo.  At 3200 dpi and with a Dmax of 4.1 the Flextight blew
the
  others away with far superior scans in detail (shadow and highlight),
  clarity, colour, edge to edge sharpness etc. etc.
 
  I will be getting my one on Monday :-)
 
  Simon
 
 
 
--
--
  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




Mikael Risedal
Photographer


_
Kom med i världens största e-posttjänst; MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com/sv


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as 

[filmscanners] Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread Edward P. Richards

Any good tips for flattening negatives before you scan them?  When I get
negatives back from the lab, they have a pronounced side to side curl that
makes loading theming to the scanner a problem, much less getting good edge
to edge resolution.  Pre-flattening seems a much better option than glass
carriers or new scanners.

Thanks!
Ed


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Austin Franklin


 I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
 the mailing
 list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems . I
 did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
 35+ against Imacon Photo.
 None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.

How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some sharpening on
their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about the
others.

Austin


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] RE: Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread John's ntl account

Books

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Edward P.
Richards
Sent: 09 March 2002 14:56
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Flattening negatives

Any good tips for flattening negatives before you scan them?  When I get
negatives back from the lab, they have a pronounced side to side curl
that
makes loading theming to the scanner a problem, much less getting good
edge
to edge resolution.  Pre-flattening seems a much better option than
glass
carriers or new scanners.

Thanks!
Ed



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: Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread Ralf Schmode

Edward P. Richards schrieb:

 Any good tips for flattening negatives before you scan them?

Hi, Ed,

I just store them laid flat in the paper sleeves they come in for a week
or so which significantly reduces curl. If stored this way for a longer
period, e.g. a month or so, they're almost completely flat. I have a
Nikon LS-40 which is said to have DOF problems with curled film but I
still have to meet a negative or slide I cannot get a scan of which is
sharp from corner to corner.

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: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Mikael Risedal

From: Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 10:17:14 -0500
Imacon has a build in USM equal to about  60%..   radius 1+ tresh. 1  in
the sofware
  Even if I try to increase sharpness a lot  in PS  with other scanners
pictures  they are not good as Imacon in sharpness.
Mikael Risedal

  I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
  the mailing
  list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems .
I
  did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and
Polaroid
  35+ against Imacon Photo.
  None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.

How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some sharpening on
their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about
the
others.

Austin


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body




Mikael Risedal
Photographer


_
Chatta med vänner online, prova MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.se


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Simon Lamb

Austin Franklin wrote:


  I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
  the mailing
  list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems .
I
  did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and
Polaroid
  35+ against Imacon Photo.
  None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.

 How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some sharpening on
 their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
 specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about
the
 others.


Austin

All sharpening was off, we double checked it to ensure an even test.  We
also turned it on to see the difference and, to be honest, the Flextight was
as sharp with sharpening turned off as the other two were with it turned on.
Turning sharpening on in the Flextight did produce absolutely stunning
scans, the best I have seen I think.

I have sent an email to Imacon to check that there is no hardware sharpening
being done without the being aware of it.

Simon

Simon


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Moreno Polloni

 I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
 the mailing
 list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems . I
 did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
 35+ against Imacon Photo.
 None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.

 How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some sharpening
 on their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
 specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about
the
 others.

I tested a Flextight II last year, and later found out that even with
software sharpening set at 0, there's still a significant amount of
sharpening applied. To turn off software sharpening, a fairly large negative
value has to be entered, something like -100 or -200.



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Dave King

I didn't say edge to edge sharpness is a software issue, but shadow detail
and noise in color negs scans certainly is.  That is the part of the neg
that is the easiest for the hardware to deal with.
Dave

- Original Message -
From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:08 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK


That is not so Dave.  Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps greatly.  Shadow detail, and particularly noise
in teh shadow detail, is not a software issue, it is an issue of how the
scanning light source and hardware create the noise and accentuate grain.
The depth of detail extracted from the shadow areas is not a software issue
(altough software can help) but also to do with the Dmax of the scanner.
Colour and clarity can also be assisted using Vuwscan, but the scanner has
to be able to record them reasonably accurately in the first place.

I am confident that Vuescan will not help to resolve some of these issue,
particularly edge to edge sharpness.  I use Vuescan all the time and will
try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.

Simon

Dave King wrpte:

 When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in all
 the parameters you mention except detail resolution.  I don't know how
much
 the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other scanners
 you mention can take heart in the fact that Vuescan exists.

 Dave

 - Original Message -
 From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:39 PM
 Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK


 David Lewiston wrote:

  Simon
 
  To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
 
  Just did another websearch on Imacon. At the Luminous Landscape site I
 found
  the following entry for Oct 24, 2001: At the beginning of this month
 Imacon
  announced that they had reduced the price of the Imacon Flextight Photo
to
  US$6,495 from its original price of $9,995. I have just been informed
that
  Imacon is currently offering a limited-time US$1,500 mail-in rebate
which
  effectively reduces the net cost to the end-user to $4,995.
 
  It seems to be the Flextight 1, which does 35mm only at a resolution of
  3,200 dpi, about half the resolution of its big brother.
 

 David

 It is indeed the Flextight Photo.  I used this in the dealer to scan a
35mm
 and 6x6 neg on a Sprintscan 120, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and the
 Flextight Photo.  At 3200 dpi and with a Dmax of 4.1 the Flextight blew
the
 others away with far superior scans in detail (shadow and highlight),
 clarity, colour, edge to edge sharpness etc. etc.

 I will be getting my one on Monday :-)

 Simon


 --
--
 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: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Dave King

Vuescans advantages over most software (haven't used Flextight's, but hear
it's superb) has to do with the fact you can bring a scan into photoshop
somewhere between raw and final, enabling difficult shadow transition edits
that are far superior to most other software I've tried.  It combines the
qualities of editing raw files with the convenience of CM and good film
terms

Dave

- Original Message -
From: Mikael Risedal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 9:35 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK


From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 11:08:16 -
Simon!
I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in the mailing
list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems . I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.
Comparing  a picture from LS4000 and Imacon Photo ,  the Nikon LS 4000
picture are so inferior to the Imacon that I recommend Nikon to rebuild and
improve the scanner before they are selling this crap. Last week I did a new
scanner test who shows that  also a Minolta Elite 2 scanner at 2800ppi
outperformed my LS4000 regarding  over all sharpness.  The Minolta scanner
cost about the half price of a Nikon LS 4000 scanner. ,
Nikonscan , Silverfast  and now Vuescan allows us to decide focus point
manually. This helps a little bit against curved film problem but not 100%
The depth of field are still to short in the LS4000 and LS 2000 scanner
construction.
Some people  believes that Vuescan are doing something else that Nikonscan
or Silverfast or other scanner software's not are capable to do. All
software's are working in a similar  way regarding calculation of  a
picture. The Imacons software and scanners are outstanding regarding all
parameters and  counts to the semi or high end destop scanners leuge.The
rest are still mid end scanners.
Mikael Risedal









That is not so Dave.  Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it is
a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
film in the Flextight helps greatly.  Shadow detail, and particularly noise
in teh shadow detail, is not a software issue, it is an issue of how the
scanning light source and hardware create the noise and accentuate grain.
The depth of detail extracted from the shadow areas is not a software issue
(altough software can help) but also to do with the Dmax of the scanner.
Colour and clarity can also be assisted using Vuwscan, but the scanner has
to be able to record them reasonably accurately in the first place.

I am confident that Vuescan will not help to resolve some of these issue,
particularly edge to edge sharpness.  I use Vuescan all the time and will
try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.

Simon

Dave King wrpte:

  When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in
all
  the parameters you mention except detail resolution.  I don't know how
much
  the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other
scanners
  you mention can take heart in the fact that Vuescan exists.
 
  Dave
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:39 PM
  Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK
 
 
  David Lewiston wrote:
 
   Simon
  
   To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
  
   Just did another websearch on Imacon. At the Luminous Landscape site I
  found
   the following entry for Oct 24, 2001: At the beginning of this month
  Imacon
   announced that they had reduced the price of the Imacon Flextight
Photo
to
   US$6,495 from its original price of $9,995. I have just been informed
that
   Imacon is currently offering a limited-time US$1,500 mail-in rebate
which
   effectively reduces the net cost to the end-user to $4,995.
  
   It seems to be the Flextight 1, which does 35mm only at a resolution
of
   3,200 dpi, about half the resolution of its big brother.
  
 
  David
 
  It is indeed the Flextight Photo.  I used this in the dealer to scan a
35mm
  and 6x6 neg on a Sprintscan 120, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and the
  Flextight Photo.  At 3200 dpi and with a Dmax of 4.1 the Flextight blew
the
  others away with far superior scans in detail (shadow and highlight),
  clarity, colour, edge to edge sharpness etc. etc.
 
  I will be getting my one on Monday :-)
 
  Simon
 
 
 
--
--
  Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
  or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message
title
or body
 


[filmscanners] Re: Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread Dave King

First advice is go to a better lab:)  That's not a normal result.

If you can tape the film edges in the carrier that's one way.  Otherwise
about all you can do that doesn't risk damage is to flatten with weight and
wait, or get a glass carrier.

Dave

- Original Message -
From: Edward P. Richards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 9:56 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Flattening negatives


Any good tips for flattening negatives before you scan them?  When I get
negatives back from the lab, they have a pronounced side to side curl that
makes loading theming to the scanner a problem, much less getting good edge
to edge resolution.  Pre-flattening seems a much better option than glass
carriers or new scanners.

Thanks!
Ed



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Austin Franklin


 Austin Franklin wrote:

 
   I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
   the mailing
   list you found what I have been written about  film flatness
 problems .
 I
   did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and
 Polaroid
   35+ against Imacon Photo.
   None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.
 
  How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some
 sharpening on
  their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
  specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about
 the
  others.


 Austin

 All sharpening was off, we double checked it to ensure an even test.  We
 also turned it on to see the difference and, to be honest, the
 Flextight was
 as sharp with sharpening turned off as the other two were with it
 turned on.
 Turning sharpening on in the Flextight did produce absolutely stunning
 scans, the best I have seen I think.

 I have sent an email to Imacon to check that there is no hardware
 sharpening
 being done without the being aware of it.


Hi Simon,

How do you know sharpening was off?  See Moreno's post...point is, it's not
so easy to know what the hardware is actually doing!

Regards,

Austin


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Moreno Polloni

 Vuescans advantages over most software (haven't used Flextight's, but
hear
it's superb) has to do with the fact you can bring a scan into photoshop
somewhere between raw and final, enabling difficult shadow transition edits
that are far superior to most other software I've tried.  It combines the
qualities of editing raw files with the convenience of CM and good film
terms

I hear the Mac Imacon software is pretty good, but the PC version I tried
last year was pretty bad. Easily the buggiest and most unstable scanner
software I've ever come across. They didn't put a whole lot of effort into
it. Hopefully they've improved on that. Otherwise, anyone serious about the
Imacon scanner should also be considering a Mac to run the software on.



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Simon Lamb

Dave

I accept that the software can assist in pulling more information out of a
negative but if the scanner does not have the capability in the hardware to
read it then it isn't going to materialise in the output scan file.  I doubt
that Vuescan will ever get my lowly LS30 to perform better than it does now,
and it will never meet the level of the Flextight, SS120, MDSMP or Nikon
8000.

I have seen the review of the MDSMP where a scan showed a lot of noise in a
particularly dark part of the scan.  16x multisampling erradicated most of
it although there was visible banding.

Simon

Dave King wrote:

 I didn't say edge to edge sharpness is a software issue, but shadow detail
 and noise in color negs scans certainly is.  That is the part of the neg
 that is the easiest for the hardware to deal with.
 Dave

 - Original Message -
 From: Simon Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 6:08 AM
 Subject: [filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK


 That is not so Dave.  Edge to edge sharpness is not a software issue, it
is
 a film flatness issue in the scaner, and an area where the curving of the
 film in the Flextight helps greatly.  Shadow detail, and particularly
noise
 in teh shadow detail, is not a software issue, it is an issue of how the
 scanning light source and hardware create the noise and accentuate grain.
 The depth of detail extracted from the shadow areas is not a software
issue
 (altough software can help) but also to do with the Dmax of the scanner.
 Colour and clarity can also be assisted using Vuwscan, but the scanner has
 to be able to record them reasonably accurately in the first place.

 I am confident that Vuescan will not help to resolve some of these issue,
 particularly edge to edge sharpness.  I use Vuescan all the time and will
 try and re-do my comparison using it with the SS120 and MSMP.

 Simon

 Dave King wrpte:

  When you're scanning color negs software is the determining factor in
all
  the parameters you mention except detail resolution.  I don't know how
 much
  the price of the Flextight has fallen, but those using the other
scanners
  you mention can take heart in the fact that Vuescan exists.

  David Lewiston wrote:
 
   Simon
  
   To answer my own question about 'how much scanner?'...
  
   Just did another websearch on Imacon. At the Luminous Landscape site I
  found
   the following entry for Oct 24, 2001: At the beginning of this month
  Imacon
   announced that they had reduced the price of the Imacon Flextight
Photo
 to
   US$6,495 from its original price of $9,995. I have just been informed
 that
   Imacon is currently offering a limited-time US$1,500 mail-in rebate
 which
   effectively reduces the net cost to the end-user to $4,995.
  
   It seems to be the Flextight 1, which does 35mm only at a resolution
of
   3,200 dpi, about half the resolution of its big brother.
  
 
  David
 
  It is indeed the Flextight Photo.  I used this in the dealer to scan a
 35mm
  and 6x6 neg on a Sprintscan 120, Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and the
  Flextight Photo.  At 3200 dpi and with a Dmax of 4.1 the Flextight blew
 the
  others away with far superior scans in detail (shadow and highlight),
  clarity, colour, edge to edge sharpness etc. etc.
 
  I will be getting my one on Monday :-)
 
  Simon



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Simon Lamb

Austin Franklin wrote:

 
  Austin
 
  All sharpening was off, we double checked it to ensure an even test.  We
  also turned it on to see the difference and, to be honest, the
  Flextight was
  as sharp with sharpening turned off as the other two were with it
  turned on.
  Turning sharpening on in the Flextight did produce absolutely stunning
  scans, the best I have seen I think.
 
  I have sent an email to Imacon to check that there is no hardware
  sharpening
  being done without the being aware of it.
 

 Hi Simon,

 How do you know sharpening was off?  See Moreno's post...point is, it's
not
 so easy to know what the hardware is actually doing!

 Regards,

 Austin


Good point and I saw that post and am waiting for a reply from Imacon.
However, even if sharpening is applied (and if it is it is done very well
indeed) the quality of the output was what I was concerned with and that was
superb.

I have read many reviews now on the SS120, Minolta Dimage Multi Pro, Nikon
8000 etc. and the only reviews I have read that do not state any real
negatives are the one regarding the Flextight (and the real negative for
many is the price).  The scanning software is reputedly the best available
(barring the obvious benefits that Vuescan brings to other scanners), there
is no talk of banding (as can be seen on Nikon and Dimage scans with the
three CCD lines (Vuescan resolving this by using only one line as per the
Nikon recommended fix for the problem),  edge to edge sharpness is as good
as it gets without a real drum scanner and the Flextight is generally
regarded as a reference scanner.

Now, given the recent price reductions, for another £1,000 more than the
competition, I can't see any reason to consider any other scanner over the
Flextight.  I am always open to contrary views though, and if anyone can
provide good reasons not to go the Flextight route (barring saving the
money) then I would take all advice on board.

As you know Austin, I have been wanting to upgrade my scanner for a while
and have seriouslky considered the Leaf 45 in the past.  However, getting
hold of a good one in the UK is nigh on impossible and I can't seem to get
satisfactory enough answers from eBay sellers to make me comfortable paying
to import one from abroad.  I do a lot of black and white and the Leaf, as
you have stated, excels at real bw as opposed to averaged out RGB scans.
The film profiles in the Flextight software gave me the opportunity to see a
Delta 100 scan like I have never seen before emerge from the scanner.

As with my other photographic purchases, I want the best quality in all
parts of the process, from taking the image through to piezo printing the
output.  Right now, I believe the Felxtight provides another strong link in
that quality chain, without the negatives I consistently read about with
others scanners, and at a reasonably comparitive price.

Simon



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread Arthur Entlich

If the negs are really bowed, speak to your lab.  They are using
incorrect drying technique.  Chances are they are using too hot a
temperature, or the drying is being done unevenly.

All force-dried negs tend to have a bit of a curve, but if it is severe,
they need to change who they are doing it.

I hope you don't have a Nikon scanner ;-)

Art

Edward P. Richards wrote:

 Any good tips for flattening negatives before you scan them?  When I get
 negatives back from the lab, they have a pronounced side to side curl that
 makes loading theming to the scanner a problem, much less getting good edge
 to edge resolution.  Pre-flattening seems a much better option than glass
 carriers or new scanners.

 Thanks!
 Ed



Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Arthur Entlich

Although I agree that hardware sharpening, or even non-disclosed
software sharpening, is problematic in testing for non-sharpened images
in analyzing sharpness, I question the value of looking at a
non-sharpened image in terms of determining which scanner has higher
resolution, unless there is an absolute way to determine that all
sharpening has been removed and you are seeing the raw CCD result
after just A/D conversion has occurred.

Since each scanner may use different hardware filtering, which is built
into the processing, and may not be fully removable, perhaps a better
test of a scanner is to simply attempt to produce the BEST scan possible
even if that requires using after scan secondary unsharp masking.  I
mean, at the end of the day (and I do realize the need for an
unsharpened image for submission before final correction or use of the
image is determined) the idea should be to have a result that provides
the sharpest image without adding distracting artifacts from the
sharpening process.

For instance, if a scanner used hardware or firmware sharpening, would
it be possible to accurately remove that via software during or after
the scanning process?  Can using negative sharpness, accurately remove
the sharpness created via electronics, to bring the image back to its
raw (unsharpened) state or is it more like switching a TIF to JPEG and
back to TIFF and expecting to end up with the same image one started with?

So perhaps the best comparison of scans is to have all the images
sharpened to the maximum amount they can handle without objectionable
artifacting, using whatever methods and parameters of sharpening is
required to do that, and compare those results.

Art



Moreno Polloni wrote:

I think you have done a good conclusion here. If you go back in
the mailing
list you found what I have been written about  film flatness problems . I
did last summer a test with my own 3 scanners LS2000. LS4000 and Polaroid
35+ against Imacon Photo.
None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness and Dmax.


How do you know that any of the scanners weren't doing some sharpening
on their own?  I'm asking if you confirmed that they weren't...  I would
specifically suspect the Imacon did some sharpening...I don't know about

 the

others.


 I tested a Flextight II last year, and later found out that even with
 software sharpening set at 0, there's still a significant amount of
 sharpening applied. To turn off software sharpening, a fairly large negative
 value has to be entered, something like -100 or -200.







Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Austin Franklin


 Although I agree that hardware sharpening, or even non-disclosed
 software sharpening, is problematic in testing for non-sharpened images
 in analyzing sharpness, I question the value of looking at a
 non-sharpened image in terms of determining which scanner has higher
 resolution,

Hi Art,

We weren't talking about resolution, but sharpness...as the statement was:

None of them could match the Imacon scanner in sharpness...

Though I don't believe what you said above was relevant to the issue being
discussed, your point is correct.  Sharpening won't increase resolution,
just sharpness ;-)

Regards,

Austin


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] RE: New price on Flextight Photo in UK

2002-03-09 Thread Austin Franklin

Simon,

 I accept that the software can assist in pulling more information out of a
 negative

Boy, do I disagree with that...  How on earth can software pull more
information out of a negative, aside from the control of the light source
and the analog gain stage prior to the A/D?  Those aren't software issues,
but operator or firmware/calibration issues.

Austin


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body



[filmscanners] Re: Flattening negatives

2002-03-09 Thread

Date sent:  Sat, 09 Mar 2002 15:58:14 -0800
Send reply to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:   Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[filmscanners] Re: Flattening negatives

 If the negs are really bowed, speak to your lab.  They are using
 incorrect drying technique.  Chances are they are using too hot a
 temperature, or the drying is being done unevenly.

 All force-dried negs tend to have a bit of a curve, but if it is severe,
 they need to change who they are doing it.

Generally, roller transport processors are the worst for everything. They're kept at 
the maximum
in control development temps for minimum time span runs (if indeed they are kept in 
control at
all). They are often one shot chemistry feed, rather than replinishment method, and 
the final
drying section is simply too hot. And of course they are dirty, prone to junk embedded 
in
emulsion and scratching.

If you can find a place that does dip and dunk processing you'll be much happier. 
With E-6,
they are also the best for tight processing controls, assuming the place keeps a close 
finger on
the pulse (which most do, as the machines are generally $50K and up).


   Mac McDougald -- DOOGLE DIGITAL
  500 Prestwick Ridge Way # 39 - Knoxville, TN 37919
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]  865-540-1308  http://www.doogle.com


Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body