Re: Getting around the firewire problem was Re: filmscanners: Best film scan...
In a message dated 8/26/2001 4:59:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I've said, if Nikon marketed camera equipment in the same way, regularly making older equipment obsolete, Canon would have squished the company long ago. Nobody pays Nikon prices and then tolerates obsolescence a few years later. The same is even more true for companies like Leica. comparing apples to oranges; filmscanners to camera lenses
Re: filmscanners: Shadows and Scanwit 2720s
In a message dated 08/09/2001 8:22:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The second Dimage Scan has fewer bad elements, but it appears to suffer from a wide area of miscalibrated elements. I am still trying to determine if this problem is due to the calibration routine failing sometimes, which might, in part be a software problem. Like I said, I'm *sure* I don't know what I'm doing (yet?)! The only thing I noticed so far is a print with a deep blue sky and no clouds had a faint wavy look to it (I don't even know the terminology!!). From what I've read on this list blues are tough so I'm hoping this *may* be expected for a blue sky. Are you going to send back your second SDII, Art? Ed
Re: filmscanners: Shadows and Scanwit 2720s
In a message dated 8/9/2001 5:39:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How about giving some more details on the picture, printer, scanner, and software? Somebody on the List can probably help. Best regards--LRA Thanks Lynn. I'm very "green" at this point. I have a Scan Dual II and Epson 860 printer. I have Photoshop but really haven't scratched the surface yet. I don't have Vuescan and with all due respect, I think at this point it would be overload. The SDII software seems reasonable; no crashes, lockups, or glitches. It seems to work as advertised. Frankly, out of the box, I am very pleased with the combo I have. The printer is unbelievable for $100. I am not sure if my "giddiness" will wear off as I learn more of the pratfalls of scanning/printing. I am generally very picky and demanding of things I do so I often question whether or not it is "good" or not. The picture was a closeup of a seagull sitting on a red "fire-hydrant" of some sort taken on Santa Barbara pier. The background is one solid shade of a very deep, dark blue, which is accurate in color, just faint "posterization"?? Thanks for your help Ed
Re: filmscanners: Shadows and Scanwit 2720s
In a message dated 8/9/2001 8:09:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1) provide a scan lacking streaking, banding, variation of exposure within a frame or out of focus images can't argue with that 4) provide a readable manual that makes sense to the average person who would make such a purchase. Yes, the "translational" English is tough to understand. Especially the part where it tells you to put the emulsion side down on the top of a page and the very next section says to put emulsion side up!! I tried it both ways! 5) reasonably handle negs and slides at least one f-stop over and under exposed, and more reasonably 2 stops in each direction from "exact" exposure. I haven't tried negatives yet. Even with the greater latitude, I believe these will be more difficult for me. I'll probably try TMAX or some other B W first. Ed
Re: filmscanners: Shadows and Scanwit 2720s
In a message dated 08/07/2001 12:40:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, not damaged. These sorts of horribleness are revealed when you try and use a scanner beyond its capabilities. You are exposing behaviour which would normally be hidden 'below' the black point, and then amplifying the defects by boosting contrast. Basically, if a sensible black point doesn't allow a decent scan you are stuffed. Regards Tony Sleep Could this be what is buggering Art and his new SDII? Asking for more than the scanner is capable? I also have a new SDII and seem to get some nice prints from scans. Of course, I don't know what I am doing yet. But I would think blowing up a scan 2-300% would show the uglies from the scanner. I understand pushing the limits to see how far you can go but Ed
Re: filmscanners: Anyone having problems with Scan@leben?
In a message dated 08/02/2001 6:56:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Quite honestly, anyone who uses a PC without running a competent antvirus program is driving down a one way street with their eyes closed. Norton AV costs very little ($40US), updates are automatic (nightly here) and free for a year, Norton is (was) very HEAVY on my system. It would constantly crash and burn regularly and slow down my system to the point it was unusable. I believe I tried it when they came out with 6.0 (?) version 1 1/2 years ago I think. Maybe they got the kinks worked out of it but it left such a bad taste in my mouth I swore I would never try it again. Should I? Ed
Re: filmscanners: Supra 400 shadows
In a message dated 08/01/2001 2:43:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My (admittedly drastic) solution has been to stop using Supra 400. I've switched entirely to Provia 400F slide film, and I find it scans just beautifully. I have heard some horrible reviews of this film. Of course, it will surely come up short if comparing it to Provia 100F. I'd love to open up my world 2 stops in a decent manner. Ed
Re: filmscanners: Provia 400F (was: Supra 400 shadows)
In a message dated 8/2/2001 3:09:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also IMO it's going to become the Tri-X of slide films. Higher praise than that I cannot give. Woo Hoo!! I'm in Ed
Re: OT - Nikon N80 was T400CN was filmscanners: Grain
It's a great camera! For the price, you'd be hard pressed to find more features. It hasn't failed me yet (1 year plus), and I take it hiking alot in the mountains, contradicting the knock on it that it has a poor *build quality* or *plasticky feel*. Love it. Ed in Atlanta
Re: filmscanners: Minolta Dual II banding
In a message dated 05/30/2001 6:57:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Under any circumstances, thanks for the heads up, I'll be sure to test mine when it arrives. Art Mine is so far so good, although I have only scanned about 20 slides (no negatives yet). I am getting greater detail than I expected from shadows (my opinion relative to nothing else). I am keeping my fingers crossed I don't have any of the problems discussed above. Ed
filmscanners: Epson 860
Hey Rob Finally Installed my new scan dual II and Epson 860. --Scanner seems fine except for very dark scans that are seemingly properly exposed slides. With the SDII software when I hit over-expose or lighten, it seems to fall into line with what I "think" I took a picture of. --Also, I am getting red banding on the 860 with my first sample print out of the box without calling tech support or reading the book. --Any quick ideas?? The banding seems to be a bigger problem. I have both devices hooked up to USB ports on my pc (no hub). any help is appreciated. Thanks Ed
Re: filmscanners: Re: OT Endless Posts
In a message dated 04/10/2001 5:11:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Further, you have been quite dismissive of sometimes interesting, sometimes useful contributions that come from people with longer or wider experience than your own. Those who are ignorant of their history are destined to repeat it. Art I have not been dismissive of the contributions by you and others. If you read my post, I was agreeing with the original poster that sometimes it gets WAY out. I also said that this is part of "the cost of goods sold" and didn't blasphemize it. FWIW, I am for the most part a lurker and would be considered "amateur" at best. Not computer illiterate, but learning far more from yours and others expertise than I could ever contribute. Lastly, my post was a generalization and not specific to you or any other poster, but alas, I knew you couldn't resist reply. :-) Ed
filmscanners: Re: OT Endless Posts
In a message dated 04/08/2001 4:26:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 33 to summarize ALL posts to date, then quote them (including all the headers and footers of course) and then add "Me too." 19 to quote the "Me toos" to say, "Me three." 52 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy. Mike I couldn't have said it better. It seems many posters like to hear themselves talk and opine. Or debate endlessly like "Well said Joe, but you know, back in 1969 when I worked for Jet Propulsion Labs, we experimented with a coating for an airplane wing that is a direct descendant of the dye and crystal layer of archival CD-R's!" On and On, yada yada yada. This is the price we pay for the knowledge we receive. And I have just added meaningless bandwidth to this discussion for adding my .02 cents. Ed
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
In a message dated 3/10/2001 6:40:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does it mention if Photoshop 5.0LE also comes with the white, as well as the GF software? Art Says it comes with both for both "versions". I have since e-mailed Minolta and was very surprised by the quick response in light of hearing about slow to no support from Minolta. They did confirm that "white" was with the Genuine Fractals 2.0 software. They did say that there was no such thing as a "white" version, just confirmed the part number that was $50 more had GF. Now my second question, is GF worth it? Thanks Ed
filmscanners: Scan Dual II
Now for something completely different: what is the difference between the Scan Dual II and Scan Dual II White? Both come up after a search of cdnet and znet, with the White version being about $50 more. It may be the Genuine Fractals software, but I'm not sure. If GF is the extra amount, is it a worthy investment? Or just another bell and whistle I don't need? Thanks Ed
Re: filmscanners: File sizes, file formats, etc. for printing 8.5 x 11and 13...
In a message dated 02/28/2001 3:52:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When I think I'll rework an image, I realise I may have become fussier by then, so I usually save the raw image data file from my scanner as well, on CD. I'll then be able to rework it in about a year's time in Vuescan version 247.7.24. By then it will probably read my mind and guess correctly what I'd like to have done with the image in the first place. Alan If you save in JPEG once, re-open to work on it once, and then save it as a TIFF, how much quality do you lose? And when you save raw data, what kind of file is that and how much space does it take up? Thanks Ed
Re: filmscanners: Beginner's question on which scanner to chose
In a message dated 02/11/2001 10:22:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Vuescan only costs $40 US. The LS-30 is selling in a refurbished model for $500 US right now, as Nikon is about to release a new series of scanners. The only problem reported in any regularity with the Nikon scanners is stepper motor failures and jagged edges when using Nikons software. The advantage is the ICE system which does a good job of cleaning up dust, dirt and scratches, which can take a lot of time to fix by hand in Photoshop. The other two scanners with ICE features are the Minolta Elite (also out of the budget) and the new Acer 2740, which is within that budget, but still getting some bugs worked out. All these are SCSI interfaced scanners. Also in this price range are the Canon FS 2710 (NOT the FS 2700), also SCSI, but lacking the digital ICE dust and scratch cleaner, and the Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II, which also doesn't have digital ICE, and used the USB interface, but has otherwise been reported to be excellent and has had a price drop placing it at about $400 US. I consider it a "best value" in today's current market due to its resolution (over 2800 dpi) and reasonable dynamic range, motorized feed, and ability to work with multi-scan in Vuescan. If the Nikon LS30 price drops (due to newer models) near the range of the Minolta Scan Dual II or Canon 2710 is it the general consensus of this list that the LS30 is the better scanner? And if so, is the reason solely the ICE feature? Ed
Re: filmscanners: Re: paperless office
In a message dated 2/1/2001 11:17:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . My comment was tongue-in-cheek with a smiley face to boot; it was not an instance of coping an attitude. Amen
Re: filmscanners: Re: paperless office
In a message dated 01/31/2001 12:00:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The Electronic Communications Act 2000 is a start Faxed copies of legal documents such as lien waivers, applications and affadavits are being accepted as "legal" to the courts in some areas. Some counties have public record items on their websites such as property owners or criminal records, for example. Ed in Atlanta
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
In a message dated 01/26/2001 8:46:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You might want to look at an Epson 760 (I'd have said 1160 except you said no larger than 8x10) with the Cone Piezography system. The 760 seems unbelievably cheap at the moment in the USA so it would probably be worth a try. Lowest current prices off Cnet: 760 $96 870$188 1160 $267 1270 $345 The 760 does seem incredibly cheap but not so for the 1160. Of course, the ability to use third party inks in the 760/1160 is an advantage as well as not having the "orange plague" issue to worry about with the 870/1270 Ed in Atlanta
Re: filmscanners: Power Crisis and UPS (OT)
In a message dated 01/21/2001 11:54:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please terminate the remarks. The power shortage is a major crisis in California and spilling over into the states that surround it because they are all connected to the US power grid. The State Legislature sold the snip Unfortunately, California doesn't have anyone to blame but the liberal "tree-hugger" officials they elected. The "not in my backyard" theory has prevented them from building any power plants in over 10 years! The backlash from this could result in some of the biggest corporations driving your economy to move out of California (i.e. Intel). While I feel your pain, think about your electric bill next time you vote. Personally, I think it disgraceful to have something preventable (only took 10 years, everyone knew it was coming!) happen in our biggest state Ed in Atlanta
Re: filmscanners: Power Crisis and UPS (OT)
In a message dated 01/22/2001 9:49:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. This is the result of the deregulation "let's let the free market resolve all our problems" mania which comes mainly from so-called conservative folks such as the one we just got selected for pres... looks like one of his first moves will be to "de-regulate" public education with his voucher program... Ought to be interesting to watch the price of the private schools go up Also the lobbying efforts of Duke Energy and their cohorts helped a lot... check out who the Ca. utilities owe the money to 2. This is way OT. All it will do is incite more useless diatribe between nuts like us.:) Last time I checked California's governing body was HUGELY democratic. Precisely the reason they didn't build any power plants. The liberals (i.e. tree-huggers) say not in my backyard. They don't want any pollution, they want to spend millions on the survival of a certain species of bird, etc, etc. Then when something happens, who screams the loudest?? Liberals, of course who want to blame it on conservatives! BTW, If you want to blame someone at the national level, why not Bill C? This crisis has been evolving for over 10 years, and he didn't do anything for 8 years. Oh I know, you'll blame it on the older George Bush!!! : My last response to this, I promise! Ed in Atlanta
Re: filmscanners: Power Crisis and UPS (OT)
In a message dated 01/22/2001 10:58:30 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah, let's just cut it all down and pave it all over. Won't life be worth living then? We can also go back to NO running water, toilets, hot water, heat, or elctricity. Modern conveniences, even the simplest ones, take sacrifice. So to put up power plants out of eyesight or earshot and pretend they're not there is just plain ignorance IMHO. Ed in Atlanta
Re: Negative film scanning - Polaroid SS4000+SilverFast vs. Nikon LS-2000
In a message dated 10/11/2000 2:18:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ME most problems with negs have far more to do with software and /or brain errors than the hardware itself. I rather think you probably could have got good results with the Dualscan with perseverance to find a good working method, and it's a bullet you are likely to have to bite whichever scanner you choose. Some film and lighting combinations just seem tricky. Tony I know this is purely subjective (but what isn't on this list g) but is there a scanner that gives good balance (scans) for both slides and negs?? Or is it some software does well with one and not the other? Then we throw in the operator and we're back to square one? Right? Did I answer my own question?? Ed The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Canoscan FS2710
Does the Canoscan FS2710 have ICE?? If so, was it Nikon technology? Is it the same in every scanner? Meaning if a scanner has ICE, is it universal in what it does? (apologies for being late I was on vacation!) Ed The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
