[filmscanners] Re: Scan Glow
Hello All, My apologies for the delay in responding but I receive the Filmscanners info in Digest form (once per day). To answer some questions: I do have a cover for the scanner (since Day 1), so dust is not an issue. Also, the glow around white objects in the scan of the slide surrounds the object itself. (That means the glow is seen in the horizontal and the vertical.) So, I think the response about the different layers of the slide film being the culprit is accurate. And, that this effect is being seen with different scanners by different manufacturers (Nikon, Minolta, Polaroid) seems to indicate that it is a CCD/Design effect/flaw. By the way, at Baboo on West 20th Street in Manhattan, NYC, E-6 processing (for 35mm Provia/36 exposure) is $5.20 USD if one pays in cash (three hour processing). Tax is 8.25% on top of that. Push processing is $1/roll extra. Processing may be a few cents cheaper at FlatIron nearby on West 17th street ($8 for three hour processing and $4.62 for 24 hour processing). The girlfriend/photographer prefers Baboo, while I prefer the latter. We just wish there was a better way to reduce the glow surrounding fledgling Peregrine Falcons photographed in June at 55 Water Street and then Riverside Church. Thanks All, Robert DeCandido, PhD Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Halo Effect
Hello All, I have a Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 (not the Plus version) and am using Vuescan. When I scan a slide (either Kodachrome or Provia/35mm), the white areas (such as a building illuminated by the sun; or pages of an open book) in the scan will exhibit a halo effect. This appears as a kind of a whitish or even greenish glow surrounding the white object in the scan. My questions are: Is anyone else seeing this or getting this effect on their scans? Is this something gone wrong with the scanner? Is it something that different scan settings in Vuescan can correct? Using Knockout 2.0 I can correct most if not all of the halo or after glow. However, if someone can set me straight regarding how to solve the problem before the scan, I would be most appreciative. Thanks Robert DeCandido NYC Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Nikon 4000ED vs. Nikon 8000ED
Hello All, Is there a qualitative difference between the Nikon 4000ED scanner and the Nikon 8000ED scanner? Does the 8000ED simply handle larger formats besides 35mm, or is there some other significant difference between the two scanners? Note that new 4000ED's can be had for about $1100.oo and new 8000ED's are being advertised for about $2300.oo on the price scan web sites. Thank You, Robert DeCandido, PhD NYC Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
filmscanners: Re: Epson
Hello All, I agree with Arthur that honesty is the best policy. Period Here is a real life situation to try out your honesty with: When I purchased my Epson 1160, I thought I was getting a new printer. That was how the store in NYC sold it to me: NEW! However, upon close examination I saw that it was a refurb. The problem arose when I needed to return the printer to Epson a week later when I could not get one nozzle to clear. I told them that the printer I had just purchased was a new one despite my determining it was a refurb. Or rather, since they never asked, I never told them it was a refurb. They accepted the printer back and sent me a new one that works great. If I had told them my new printer was indeed a refurb sold to me as new, then they would have sent me a refurb in return. My point here: there are many grey areas; but yes, Honesty is the best policy. Finally, Epson has been better than most companies regarding returns and customer service. More companies should have that level of customer support. It is one of the reasons I continue to purchase Epson products, such as the 860 I just purchased for my girl friend. And finally, finally since I live in the USA I assume that the rest of the world has the same consumer laws/protection as here in the states. I sometimes forget that this is an international list with interesting people from everywhere. rdc Arthur Entlich wrote: Epson tries to walk a fine line on this matter. One the one hand, they are absolutely within their rights to refuse service, or charge for service for any printer returned during warranty which has head problems which could be related to the ink used, and in fact, I would go as far as saying they should do so. On the other hand, the cost of proving the inks were indeed not theirs is probably greater than simply repairing the unit. US law does make third party consumables a protected "right", and no company may carte blanche void warranties based upon the use of 3rd party expendables which meet or exceed manufacturer's guidelines, nor may they refuse warranty service on non-related systems. However, I also know that Epson went from a 2 year to one year warranty on many products, plus pulled toll-free support in recent years, and I do, in part, blame people who have abused their goodwill for this. I know of several people who admitted on the Epson list that they continually used 3rd party inks, and whenever they had a massive ink clog, they would return the printer to Epson with Epson ink carts in it. In some cases these people made several returns leaving Epson to cover the cost of shipping and repair. This is downright deceptive, IMHO. I have used Epson color printers since the original Epson Color Stylus. Up until now, I have used Epson inks, and up till now I have had no ink blockages I could not resolve myself. Perhaps the same would be the case with 3rd party inks, I don't know. In all likelihood, quality ink sets from any reputable dealer would be unlikely to do damage to the heads. Art Rob Geraghty wrote: "Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You do not void your warranty by using third party inks in an Epson. If you need to return the printer for servicing, just remove the CIS and re-install the Epson cartridges. See the Inkjetmall web site (Cone Peizography, eg) for a discussion of this. We have been back and forth on that issue on the Peizo list...Repeat: You do not void the warranty! I suspect Epson would take a different view if the reason the printer was being returned has due to head blocks caused by non-OEM inks. AFAIK Epson's official line is that the use of 3rd party inks voids the warranty as far as anything to do with the ink flow is concerned. Rob
filmscanners: Re: Epson Printers
Folks, Does using non-Epson paper void the Epson warranty? Someone had a superb suggestion: What happened in a real-life situation when a printer (that was using non-Epson inks) was returned to Epson? Meanwhile, I want to thank Tony Sleep for his superb moderation of this site. I must leave the list for a bit for I go off to Mexico to do research at the Monarch Butterfly Sanctuary at Angangueo; then off to Malaysia to track the migration of raptors such as the black baza and oriental honey buzzard returning to the Asian mainland from Sumatra at Tanjung Tuan. Robert DeCandido, PhD John Woodworth wrote: Yes, it would definitely be an uphill fight. One could read the Epson position even more broadly than just ink flow-related problems. At 12:12 PM 1/29/01 +1000, you wrote: A: EPSON does not recommend refilling or using 3rd party ink cartridges. Using these products will not void the Epson warranty, however, if these products cause a failure, the repair of that failure will not be covered under warranty. " Which is essentially what I wrote below - any problem caused by 3rd party inks is not covered by the warranty. :) I suspect Epson would take a different view if the reason the printer was being returned has due to head blocks caused by non-OEM inks. AFAIK Epson's official line is that the use of 3rd party inks voids the warranty as far as anything to do with the ink flow is concerned. Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: Pigmented inks was Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Rob: You do not void your warranty by using third party inks in an Epson. If you need to return the printer for servicing, just remove the CIS and re-install the Epson cartridges. See the Inkjetmall web site (Cone Peizography, eg) for a discussion of this. We have been back and forth on that issue on the Peizo list...Repeat: You do not void the warranty! rdc Rob Geraghty wrote: "Hersch Nitikman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about the 860/1160 with 3rd party archival inks? Aren't they much less costly than the 2000P? Or, what am I missing? Rob wrote: AFAIK the 2000P is the *only* printer Epson make with OEM pigment based inks Note "OEM" above. Yes, you can get 3rd party archival inks. You also void your warranty if you use them. Obscanning (kinda): has anyone tried printing a 2700dpi scan to an A3 page with an Epson 1160? Did it look OK? Rob
Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
Hello, Why not the 860 (the smaller version of the 1160)? Does up to 8x10; It can be had for about $125.00 less a $50 rebate from Epson (total @ $75). Free shipping might also be available if you look around. Try a coupon from: http://www.techbargains.com/coupons.cfm Robert DeCandido [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
filmscanners: Re: Epson 860
Hello, A CIS system is manufactured for the 860. I know for sure because I purchased a CIS for my girlfriend for Christmas. You are correct about the 860's ability to do text. She uses this printer to make 35mm slide labels and is quite pleased with the results. Robert DeCandido Rob Geraghty wrote: "Robert DeCandido" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why not the 860 (the smaller version of the 1160)? I don't think the 860 and 1160 print heads are identical. I'm pretty sure that the 760 is the smaller version of the 1160. The 860 has more black jets so it prints plain text faster. Either the 760 or 860 would be fine provided they will work with a CIS - that would require contacting the inkjetmall and checking. Rob
filmscanners: Vuescan support of Umax Astra 3400?
Ed, Has anyone had any luck with Vuescan and the Umax Astra series scanners? I may order an Astra 3400 (USB connection, not SCSI) and am curious if you believe Vuescan would support this scanner or someone has verified that it does indeed work. My goal is simply to scan a few maps, as well as utilize the scanner's ability to calibrate my printer using Profiler RGB. For the best calibration, I would prefer to use Vuescan rather than the software package that comes with the Umax Astra, so long as your software supports the scanner. Advice? Robert DeCandido
filmscanners: Maxtor vs. IBM Second Hard Drive
Hello all, Thanks for the advice to stay away from Maxtor HD's (circa $299.00 for an 80 GB HD/5600rpm). For those thinking of adding a larger capacity hard drive, an IBM 7200rpm 75GB HD can be had for about $365 USD if you shop carefully. The prices on this model (and another IBM 61 GB HD) have decreased markedly in the last two-three weeks. In this case, the extra money spent seems to insure both a better quality hard drive and access to IBM tech support via phone should something go wrong. Make sure to check your system's BIOS compatibility with any new hard drive as well before you buy. Thanks to all, Robert DeCandido
Re: filmscanners: FS: virtually new SS4k...
Regarding the SS 4000 for sale: Does it include Silverfast 5? Please state this up front for all to see/know. Also, B/H in NYC is selling a new unit for about $1350 less a $100.oo discount from Polaroid. Note: buy.com in California has had the best price for this item in the past. Look for their $30.oo discount coupon as well. Finally, the SS 4000 might be ready to come down in price since there are new comparable scanners just introduced (Kodak) or about to be (rumors of new Nikon 3500-4000dpi). So all in all, $1200 is not even close to being a reasonable price for a used SS4000. Robert DeCandido, PhD Austin Franklin wrote: I have a virtually new SprintScan 4k for sale. It has very little use, has an extra set of negative and slide holders...original box etc. Comes with latest version of Polaroid Insight, latest firmware, latest drivers, manuals, cables, SCSI card etc. Everything that came with it when I bought it a few months ago. Only reason I am selling it, is because I subsequently bought a Leafscan 45, and don't need the SS4k any more. It is a GREAT scanner, mind you. $1200/bo Still under warranty, 5 day right of return. This was NOT a refurbished unit, and currently sells for $1450 from CTC South (where I bought this one from).
filmscanners: Re: Monitors
I have the new Samsung SyncMaster 900NF (19 inch) monitor for about a month. For the price (approx. $425.00 plus $50.00 for shipping), it has been a wonderful investment. There was a review in PEI magazine (Andrew Rodney; the August issue) that sealed the deal. This monitor is significantly less than the Mitsubishi Diamond which would have been my next choice. The advantage to both of these monitors is that one can adjust (calibrate) the RGB guns. With ColorVision (PhotoCal), you will be closer to printing what you see on your monitor than with Adobe Gamma or other monitor profiling packages (Monaco, eg). Best luck, but definitely go for at least 19in. BTW, why the Epson 2000? Too much money, too slow and Cone will have a color CIS system out by next spring (so they claimed today in NYC). I would go with the 1270 in the interim. Robert DeCandido, PhD NYC
