RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
At 03:12 PM 12/4/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Also, as David mentioned, sometimes the SCSI bus won't recognize the scanner >if it's been shut off and I haven't rebooted the machine. In other words, >turn on sscanner, boot pc, wait until PC is up and running, shut off scanner >and then turn it on again hours later. The PC is a home-built dual PIII 866 >running Win2K and the scanner is hooked to an Adaptec 29160N > >Neither of these is a huge deal, especially the reboot thing, (snip) If you turn your scanner on, go into Device Manager (Win-Key - pause/break), open the SCSI controllers listing, right-click on your SCSI adapter and click Refresh under the General tab, you shouldn't need to restart. Charles
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Actually, David was talking about me when he mentioned the manual focus and reboot problem. If I try to use the manual focus feature in the Minolta software, the software will lock up when clicking ok after setting optimal manual focus (according the black and white bars). I then have to kill the software and restart it but no reboot is necessary. Strangely, point AF works fine. Also, as David mentioned, sometimes the SCSI bus won't recognize the scanner if it's been shut off and I haven't rebooted the machine. In other words, turn on sscanner, boot pc, wait until PC is up and running, shut off scanner and then turn it on again hours later. The PC is a home-built dual PIII 866 running Win2K and the scanner is hooked to an Adaptec 29160N Neither of these is a huge deal, especially the reboot thing, but manual focus would be nice. Overall, I'm very happy with it and I did have time with both the Nikon and Polaroid so I could compare. As far as I'm concerned, ICE is a must have feature which ruled out the Polaroid. Compared to the Nikon, independent of any bugs it has, I'd still probably pick the Minolta since I like the film holders better and I like the smaller size and quiter operation. Paul Wilson > -Original Message- > From: david/lisa soderman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!! > > > Rob: > > What's the consensus amongst other Scan Multi owners as to > the scanner as a > > whole. > > > > What are they reporting? > > Actually, I haven't heard all that much yet. But what I have > heard has been > all very good. (Stable, user-friendly software, good film > holders, small & > quiet machine, great shadow detail, quick scan times in > plugin mode) The > only negative comment that comes to mind is the manual focus. > One person > said that it locks up the Minolta software. He also stated > that he didn't > *need* the manual focus; just playing around. Minolta is > working on that > issue now. He also likes to keep cpu running - and to turn > scanner off. > Occasionally, he'll turn scanner on and have to reboot the cpu. > > Other than that, everyone seems very happy and excited with > their Minolta > Scan Multi Pro units thus far. > > Hopefully my unit will be arriving soon. When it does, I'll > make sure and > report all of my findings here. > > Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< > >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Rob: > What's the consensus amongst other Scan Multi owners as to the scanner as a > whole. > > What are they reporting? Actually, I haven't heard all that much yet. But what I have heard has been all very good. (Stable, user-friendly software, good film holders, small & quiet machine, great shadow detail, quick scan times in plugin mode) The only negative comment that comes to mind is the manual focus. One person said that it locks up the Minolta software. He also stated that he didn't *need* the manual focus; just playing around. Minolta is working on that issue now. He also likes to keep cpu running - and to turn scanner off. Occasionally, he'll turn scanner on and have to reboot the cpu. Other than that, everyone seems very happy and excited with their Minolta Scan Multi Pro units thus far. Hopefully my unit will be arriving soon. When it does, I'll make sure and report all of my findings here. Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
david/lisa soderman wrote: > I've asked several Minolta Scan Multi Pro > owners for actual scan times (as opposed to press releases or the > imaging-resource.com review). David What's the consensus amongst other Scan Multi owners as to the scanner as a whole. What are they reporting? Rob
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Bill F. wrote: > So what I'd do is allocate as much RAM as I possibly can to Photoshop > (in your case about 1.2GB of RAM to Photoshop leaving 300MB for the > system and other stuff), then run Photoshop alone (no other apps > running) and with no images open between scans. Thanks for your help, Bill; much appreciated. Actually, Photoshop doesn't let me allocate more than 999,999k. It simply will not permit me to type in the 7th digit. (Thus yielding 976.6 megs of Photoshop RAM) > Of course you know how to increase Photoshop's RAM allocation, right? > Go to the Finder, find the Photoshop application, select it, from the > File menu choose Get Info > Memory, in the resulting window type > 12 into the "Peferred Size:" box. Yup, I do know how to do that. But I think maybe you meant to type 1,200,000k instead of 120,000k. Try it...and let me know if it works for you. (Can't exceed 6 digits) The Nikon 8000ED produced pretty quick scans on my 400mhz Mac G4 w/1.5 gigs of RAM...IF I just stuck with 1 pass 8 bit scans with no ICE, GEM, etc. and IF I never turned on the Color Management. I clocked these times for a 6x6 neg using NikonScan as a plugin. I had maximum RAM allocated to Photoshop. (976.6 megs) Color Management was turned OFF. 2000ppi w/o ICE.1 min. 4000ppi w/o ICE.2 min. 2000ppi w/ ICE.3.5 min. 4000ppi w/ ICE.10 min. Since I've become interested in the new Minolta Scan Multi Pro, I've also become SCAN TIME conscious. I've asked several Minolta Scan Multi Pro owners for actual scan times (as opposed to press releases or the imaging-resource.com review). The peculiar thing that I've noticed here is that PC owners tend to be more willing to provide the scan times than Mac owners. I'm beginning to suspect that because PC's are currently just plain faster than Macs, the PC owners are more inclined to report their speedier scan times. Anyway, I've sent back my Nikon 8000ED in exchange for the Minolta Scan Multi Pro. When it arrives, I'll be happy to serve as a Mac owner who is willing to report all of my findings; both good and bad. Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< P.S.--- I bought my 400mhz G4 just before the end of 2000. At the beginning of 2001, Apple came out with the 800+ mhz machines. I wasn't even looking at hi-rez MF film scanners back then. (That's the way the mop flops!)
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
At 12:39 PM -0600 11/28/01, david/lisa soderman wrote: > If there's a >way to effectively allocate more RAM to NikonScan (used as a plugin)...I'd >be happy as a clam. ;-) David-- The way to give NikonScan more memory as Photoshop plug-in is to (1) allocate lots of memory to Photoshop and (2) close all images before opening NikonScan. If you have a 100MB image (uncompressed size) open in Photoshop, then Photoshop will want to have 300MB of RAM available to work with it. The same 3x ratio applies to any image size. Any less and you'll be hitting the hard disk constantly while working with the image. When you run NikonScan it takes memory from Photoshop's RAM allocation. It needs some RAM just to run and more RAM as temporary storage for the images it creates, and even more RAM if you use ICE. So what I'd do is allocate as much RAM as I possibly can to Photoshop (in your case about 1.2GB of RAM to Photoshop leaving 300MB for the system and other stuff), then run Photoshop alone (no other apps running) and with no images open between scans. Of course you know how to increase Photoshop's RAM allocation, right? Go to the Finder, find the Photoshop application, select it, from the File menu choose Get Info > Memory, in the resulting window type 12 into the "Peferred Size:" box. --Bill -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://billfernandez.com ==
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
It would make sense that some people would experience worse banding than others if the information I received from several sources is correct. Most scanners use a tri-line CCD sensor chip. In all scanners I know of other than Nikon, this tri-line has filters over each line corresponding to R G and B. Each line of the CCD is calibrated with each scan, so that all the sensor elements are properly adjusted for black and white points, which makes sense since they are probably independent, and you wouldn't want one sensor to be "hot" or "lazy", and create streaky color across your scan. Nikon's lighting system uses no colored filters on the CCD sensors, instead changing the color of the light source (R G and B LED matrixes). Therefore, they make use of all three CCD sensor lines at once. In theory a good design that could triple the capture rate. Only one problem. Nikon apparently decided to only calibrate on of the three CCD lines. Therefore the other two can have sensors which are hotter or lazier than the calibrated one, and so, only one out of each three lines scanned in the default mode have been calibrated, and this would result in banding and pulsed streaking. Now, if one was lucky, and their scanner happened to have a very even CCD, with all three lines having uniform sensors, then the banding would not show up. Nikon's response to the problem for people who have CCDs that are not as well manufactured, is to suggest only using the one scanner line which is calibrated, turning of the other two. This works well, but slows the scan down considerably. Art david soderman wrote: > > > >>If you have not experienced banding how do you run the LS8000 ? Is it in the >>fine mode? Which makes scanning slow. >> > > I've just been running it in the normal (not fine) mode. At 4000 ppi w/ICE, > 8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 > w/1.5 gigs of RAM. I have virtual memory turned off. I have maximum memory > alloted to photoshop. (Just shy of 1 gig). Don't know if it's possible to > increase the amount of memory in NikonScan when used as a plugin. I'm > starting to think it isn't. > > I'm a portrait photographer; not a scenic landscape photographer. I haven't > used the scanner all that much, but so far the banding hasn't been visible > in the normal mode. > > Aside from the hassles of using it, I really can't complain about the actual > scan quality itself. I'm quite impressed with the scan results. > > Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< > > . > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Conclusion: If I will have a slow ,banding , and even slower scanner, if I will get rid of the banding - my first choice is Nikon LS 8000. Also add to the conclusion: a scanner who not can scan a film sharp over the whole area ( if the film is not mounted in a glass frame). Do I get this scanner for free ? Mikael Risedal >From: "Paul Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!! >Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:24:47 -0800 > > >David, > > > Then I've done everything I can. The 8000ED is just plain slow > > with my Mac. > >It's ICE/GEM that is slow, not the Nikon. >If you turn off GEM especially the scan times are remarkably good in normal >mode... >I doubt if you compare equals (no ICE in either scan) that you would find >anything quicker in any of the scanners you mention. > > >At 4000 ppi w/ICE, >8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 >w/1.5 gigs of RAM. > >You also state: > >>ICE was an important factor for me. The new Minolta Scan Multi Pro was >not >shipping at the time. Others have claimed to *not* experience the banding >problem with the LS8000. > >and then say: > >but so far the banding hasn't been visible >in the normal mode. > >so, in fact the "others" are right, no? banding is getting blown out of >proportion by those who dont own the machine and/or those with vested >interests. If you do come across an unusual slide, then check the super >fine >box and- end of problem.. > >You will sort out your colour problems soon too, I'm sure. have patience, >its a remarkable machine, > >Paul > _ Hämta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt på http://explorer.msn.se
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Paul Graham wrote: > > and then say: > >but so far the banding hasn't been visible > in the normal mode. > > so, in fact the "others" are right, no? banding is getting blown out of > proportion by those who dont own the machine and/or those with vested > interests. If you do come across an unusual slide, then check the super fine > box and- end of problem.. > > You will sort out your colour problems soon too, I'm sure. have patience, > its a remarkable machine, > > Paul This is my predicament - who's correct? And I do like ICE on my LS2000. Also I can't get an answer from the agents nor will a retailer say anything to customers who own them so I can get some feedback. Who is correct?? I want to scan my 6x17 pan landscapes. Rob
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
>It's ICE/GEM that is slow, not the Nikon. >If you turn off GEM especially the scan times are remarkably good in normal >mode... >I doubt if you compare equals (no ICE in either scan) that you would find >anything quicker in any of the scanners you mention. > >>At 4000 ppi w/ICE, >>8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 >>w/1.5 gigs of RAM. AIUI, GEM is or includes a process that applies a sigma filter. Running such a filter over a large pixel-dimensioned image can be very process-cycle-intensive, depending on the filter dimension parameters. It does not seem surprising that it could take quite a while on a 400 mhz machine. There's a brief description of a sigma filter at www6.ewebcity.com/rayet/articles/imageprocess/imageprocess.asp -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
David, > Then I've done everything I can. The 8000ED is just plain slow > with my Mac. It's ICE/GEM that is slow, not the Nikon. If you turn off GEM especially the scan times are remarkably good in normal mode... I doubt if you compare equals (no ICE in either scan) that you would find anything quicker in any of the scanners you mention. >At 4000 ppi w/ICE, 8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 w/1.5 gigs of RAM. You also state: >>ICE was an important factor for me. The new Minolta Scan Multi Pro was not shipping at the time. Others have claimed to *not* experience the banding problem with the LS8000. and then say: >but so far the banding hasn't been visible in the normal mode. so, in fact the "others" are right, no? banding is getting blown out of proportion by those who dont own the machine and/or those with vested interests. If you do come across an unusual slide, then check the super fine box and- end of problem.. You will sort out your colour problems soon too, I'm sure. have patience, its a remarkable machine, Paul
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Rob wrote: > Have been looking at the price here on both the SS120 and the LS8000 and now find > there is A$1000 difference. So the choice is becoming clearer. Its do I need ICE > Cubes. But I do like what my LS2000 will do Don't forget about the new Minolta Scan Multi Pro. It also has ICE. So far, I've heard nothing but good reports on the Minolta. Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Thanks David - for the input. Have been looking at the price here on both the SS120 and the LS8000 and now find there is A$1000 difference. So the choice is becoming clearer. Its do I need ICE Cubes. But I do like what my LS2000 will do Rob david soderman wrote: > > If you have not experienced banding how do you run the LS8000 ? Is it in the > > fine mode? Which makes scanning slow. > > I've just been running it in the normal (not fine) mode. At 4000 ppi w/ICE, > 8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 > w/1.5 gigs of RAM. I have virtual memory turned off. I have maximum memory > alloted to photoshop. (Just shy of 1 gig). Don't know if it's possible to > increase the amount of memory in NikonScan when used as a plugin. I'm > starting to think it isn't. > > I'm a portrait photographer; not a scenic landscape photographer. I haven't > used the scanner all that much, but so far the banding hasn't been visible > in the normal mode. > > Aside from the hassles of using it, I really can't complain about the actual > scan quality itself. I'm quite impressed with the scan results. > > Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
Mikael wrote: > I wonder if Im missing something's here! The only thing you can do is: > 1.Allocate more RAM memory to Photoshop if you are using NikonScan as a > plugin and have a MAC computer. Give Photoshop at least 800Mb of your 1.5 > Gb RAAM memory Then I've done everything I can. The 8000ED is just plain slow with my Mac. Thanks for your help. Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
> If you have not experienced banding how do you run the LS8000 ? Is it in the > fine mode? Which makes scanning slow. I've just been running it in the normal (not fine) mode. At 4000 ppi w/ICE, 8 bit, 1 pass...a 6x6 neg takes about 10 minutes. That's on a 400 mhz G4 w/1.5 gigs of RAM. I have virtual memory turned off. I have maximum memory alloted to photoshop. (Just shy of 1 gig). Don't know if it's possible to increase the amount of memory in NikonScan when used as a plugin. I'm starting to think it isn't. I'm a portrait photographer; not a scenic landscape photographer. I haven't used the scanner all that much, but so far the banding hasn't been visible in the normal mode. Aside from the hassles of using it, I really can't complain about the actual scan quality itself. I'm quite impressed with the scan results. Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
david/lisa soderman wrote: > > Let me ask why did you buy the Nikon LS8000 if you recognised that it had > > problems with the banding? > > > > I ask - as I was considering both the SS120 and the LS8000. > > ICE was an important factor for me. The new Minolta Scan Multi Pro was not > shipping at the time. Others have claimed to *not* experience the banding > problem with the LS8000. > > Looking back, it was a risk that doesn't seem to be working out very well at > this point. I have to admit though that I have *not* experienced any > banding so far. If you have not experienced banding how do you run the LS8000 ? Is it in the fine mode? Which makes scanning slow. Rob
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
David wrote If there's a way to effectively allocate more RAM to NikonScan (used as a plugin)...I'd be happy as a clam. I wonder if Im missing something's here! The only thing you can do is: 1.Allocate more RAM memory to Photoshop if you are using NikonScan as a plugin and have a MAC computer. Give Photoshop at least 800Mb of your 1.5 Gb RAAM memory 2. If you are using NikonScan alone allocate 600Mb RAAM memory of your 1.5 Gb RAAM memory 3 There are no problem to allocate more RAAM memory to a software, if you dont know how to do it : read the help function in your MAC. Mikael Risedal -- >From: "david/lisa soderman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!! >Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:39:30 -0600 > > > Let me ask why did you buy the Nikon LS8000 if you recognised that it >had > > problems with the banding? > > > > I ask - as I was considering both the SS120 and the LS8000. > >ICE was an important factor for me. The new Minolta Scan Multi Pro was not >shipping at the time. Others have claimed to *not* experience the banding >problem with the LS8000. > >Looking back, it was a risk that doesn't seem to be working out very well >at >this point. I have to admit though that I have *not* experienced any >banding so far. I have had an old mounted slide be killer out of focus due >to shallow d.o.f.. The main problem is slow speed and horrible color. I >suspect, however, that the color problem is a simple matter of figuring out >color spaces between NikonScan and Photoshop. If I could solve that, speed >would be the only problem. I've got 1.5 gigs of RAM on a G4. If there's a >way to effectively allocate more RAM to NikonScan (used as a plugin)...I'd >be happy as a clam. ;-) > >Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< > > > _ Hämta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt på http://explorer.msn.se
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
> ICE was an important factor for me. I haven't had any dust problems with my scanner, and it doesn't have ICE...but I do make sure my film doesn't have any dust on it before putting it in the scanner. The Nikon, because of its LED illumination tends to exaggerate the dust...so it does need ICE, but you may not need it with the SS120.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
If you turn color management off then you're on your own for adjusting the colors. Now I've been scanning only Kodachromes recently and here's what I did: I turned color management off, went to preferences and set the gamma to match the gamma at which I'm running my screen, then scanned a Kodachrome IT8 target and made a custom profile based on that scan. That was the setup. Now for scanning I simply scan a Kodachrome slide, NikonScan tags it as AdobeRGB (which is dumb), I assign it my custom profile, and the colors look very good. While setting up the scan I adjust the master analog gain (if necessary) to fill the histogram in the Curves control panel, then I check the separate R, G and B histograms and increase the analog gain of any channel that doesn't fill the histogram (this assumes of course that there actually is some pure white somewhere in the slide). OK, that's for slides. If you're scanning negs the story would be different. I haven't spent as much time with negs, but I think what I'd do is turn color management ON, set it to use the "wide gamut (compensated)" color space, then later in photoshop assign the "wide gamut" profile to the scan. Good luck, --Bill At 9:45 AM -0600 11/28/01, david/lisa soderman wrote: > >What about if I have color management *OFF*? -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://billfernandez.com ==
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
> Let me ask why did you buy the Nikon LS8000 if you recognised that it had > problems with the banding? > > I ask - as I was considering both the SS120 and the LS8000. ICE was an important factor for me. The new Minolta Scan Multi Pro was not shipping at the time. Others have claimed to *not* experience the banding problem with the LS8000. Looking back, it was a risk that doesn't seem to be working out very well at this point. I have to admit though that I have *not* experienced any banding so far. I have had an old mounted slide be killer out of focus due to shallow d.o.f.. The main problem is slow speed and horrible color. I suspect, however, that the color problem is a simple matter of figuring out color spaces between NikonScan and Photoshop. If I could solve that, speed would be the only problem. I've got 1.5 gigs of RAM on a G4. If there's a way to effectively allocate more RAM to NikonScan (used as a plugin)...I'd be happy as a clam. ;-) Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
> I had similar results with my 4000ED. How to address it depends on > how you have color management set up in the preferences dialog. > > If you have color management ON, then first go into the color > management tab in preferences and make sure that the monitor profile > it shows is the one you're actually using. If not then change it. What about if I have color management *OFF*? I'd like to keep it off if possible, to keep the scan times lower. Since my initial post, I've stumbled on to something. If I select "Apple RGB" in Photoshop...and "Apple RGB" in NikonScan, the colors look good. However, if I change Photoshop to "Adobe 1998 RGB" and keep NikonScan as "Apple RGB", colors/saturation are horrible. And if I keep NikonScan at "Adobe 1998 RGB" and change Photoshop to "Adobe 1998RGB", the colors are still horrible. Interesting. So far, the only combination I've found that works is the "Apple RGB" for both Photoshop and NikonScan. Thanks for your help, Bill. I sure can use it. I am a color management "greenhorn". ;-) Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
I had similar results with my 4000ED. How to address it depends on how you have color management set up in the preferences dialog. If you have color management ON, then first go into the color management tab in preferences and make sure that the monitor profile it shows is the one you're actually using. If not then change it. Then, if you choose Adobe RGB as the output profile, NikonScan will convert the scan's colors to that color space and tag it with that profile. This is all nice and automatic. However if you choose one of the other color spaces, such as "wide gamut", or "wide gamut (compensated)" NikonScan will CONVERT the colors in the scan to the selected color space but will TAG it with the AdobeRGB profile, which seems brain dead to me! So you have to manually assign the correct profile to the scan, after which its colors should look a lot better. See if any of that helps. --Bill At 9:08 AM -0600 11/27/01, david/lisa soderman wrote: > >When I do actual scans, the image in the NikonScan preview window actually >looks quite good. However, after the scan is done...the image in Photoshop >looks horrible. It's WAY oversaturated with WAY too much reds! >(I had a similar problem with VueScan and my other scanner which was solved >by using the Adobe color space for both VueScan and Photoshop.) >Now I'm using the Adobe 1998 color space in NikonScan and Photoshop. I get >the horrible image described above. -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://billfernandez.com ==
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
david/lisa soderman wrote: > Well, I've just spent two days trying to figure out how to get my 2 week old > Nikon 8000ED to work properly. At this point, I'm just about ready to crate > it up, send it back...and go with the Minolta Scan Multi Pro. Let me ask why did you buy the Nikon LS8000 if you recognised that it had problems with the banding? I ask - as I was considering both the SS120 and the LS8000. Rob
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!!
If you are using NikonScan 3.1.1 with LS 8000 and MAC. 1. Turn of virtuell memory 2. Allocate at least 600Mb to the software alone. If you using Photoshop plugin, let Photoshop have at least 800Mb memory 3. To allocate more memory = go to Nikonscan folder, select NikonScan with your cursior so its turn aktivated, dont start Nikonscan.Go to Arkiv or (File in Englisch) next right to the Apple and go down to SHOW INFO. Here you can select memory and wright how much memory NikonScan shall have, in your case at least 600Mb Do the same procedure with Photoshop Mikael Risedal >From: "david/lisa soderman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED nightmares!!! >Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:08:08 -0600 > >Well, I've just spent two days trying to figure out how to get my 2 week >old >Nikon 8000ED to work properly. At this point, I'm just about ready to >crate >it up, send it back...and go with the Minolta Scan Multi Pro. > >First off, it is really slow. I prefer VueScan, but can only scan in the >very slow "superfine mode" with that program. That leaves NikonScan 3.1. >The scan times are faster with NikonScan, simply because I have the option >of *not* using the "superfine mode". (of course, we all know what can >happen if we do that; banding). Even so, NikonScan seems clunky and >slow...like it needs more memory. > >So...I tried to allocate more memory to NikonScan. There are no >instructions on how to do this. On the "read me" section of the NikonScan >cd, it mentions that there is info discussing limitations on allocating >memory to NikonScan which can be found inside the scanner box. >Nothing of the sort inside the box...or anywhere else. > >When I do actual scans, the image in the NikonScan preview window actually >looks quite good. However, after the scan is done...the image in Photoshop >looks horrible. It's WAY oversaturated with WAY too much reds! >(I had a similar problem with VueScan and my other scanner which was solved >by using the Adobe color space for both VueScan and Photoshop.) >Now I'm using the Adobe 1998 color space in NikonScan and Photoshop. I get >the horrible image described above. > >Next step: call Nikon Tech support. >Wait for a REALLY long time. >Get disconnected. >Call back; wait for another REALLY long time. >Finally get a girl who really seems to be "impersonating" tech support. >(She was very pleasant, but I actually think she's a secretary who happened >to be walking by as their phone was ringing in tech support) ;-) >I could go on here, but let's just put it this way...she said that turning >off NikonScan CMS (color management) is for when you want to work with >black >and white photography!!! > >In short...I'm at the end of an electronic culdusac here. > >Can anyone out there help me with my memory and color problems? >I have a 400mhz Mac G4 with 1.5 gigs of RAM. > >Thanks in advance! > >Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< > > > > _ Hämta MSN Explorer kostnadsfritt på http://explorer.msn.se
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED w/Macs???
>I use the same software, Nikon Scan 3.1, on my G4 Mac for a Nikon 4000 and >it works just fine. > Ditto on my G3 Mac with OS 9.04 for a Nikon IV ED. Mike Duncan
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED w/Macs???
I use the same software, Nikon Scan 3.1, on my G4 Mac for a Nikon 4000 and it works just fine. Jack Phipps -Original Message- From: david/lisa soderman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 8:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED w/Macs??? Lately, I've been hearing lots from Nikon 8000ED owners re: the Nikon software crashing on their P.C.'s. Just wondering if anyone out there is running the 8000ED on their Mac? How does the Nikon software work in that combination? Also, is anyone out there running VueScan/8000ED on their Mac? How's that? I have Mac O.S. 9.04. How does the latest version of VueScan work with Mac O.S. 9.04 and the 8000ED? Thanks in advance! Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:30:31 - Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > OTOH, if you're an Aries, my week has gone sorta like that (last week > more than this week, and the month before was even worse!). Uh-oh - please not here! But as a final nail in this OT coffin, I'll just say that I am an Aries, moreover with Aries rising and Mercury in Aries, and, yes, that is how it has been. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
David, Thank you for your offer to help. it shut off one more time. It's now on it's way back to B&H for a return. I ended up going with the Nikon after kicking the tires on both machines. I found that the marginal (if any) gains in shadow detail were not worth the extra time I had to spend with the cloning tool. It may just have been my unit but the scans were not quite a sharp as the 8000's. The silverfast/SS120 combo was better for color accuracy once properly calibrated. I believe I can achieve this with the 8000 as well when silverfast is available. As for my replacement 8000, it is working flawlessly now with no banding and consistent scans. Lawrence > > Lawrence, > Did the SS120 shut off again. How often has it happened. If you still have > it I certainly can get you a new one. > David >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Raphael Bustin wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > > > > Someone has angered the Scanner Gods. I think it was Art. ;-) > > Jeez, I thought Art *was* the Scanner God. > > rafe b. Yes, so don't anger me! ;-) Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
I think you are correct that Minolta will be releasing a new 35mm scanner soon. The Elite is being heavily discounted, and a 4000 dpi version would make sense. Art "Shough, Dean" wrote: I expect (hope?) that > either Polaroid or Minolta will come out with a scanner that does what I > want in the near future. Minolta just announced a medium format scanner > that has everything, when will they do 35 mm version? I am willing to wait > another 6 months and see what appears. That will give my credit card time > to recover after upgrading my computer system this month. If nothing else > appears then I will reconsider the Nikon.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
rafeb wrote: > > But curiously, our man from Polaroid is in ICE-denial, > saying that his (perceived) clientele doesn't value ICE. > > Nor did I, until I had a chance to work with it. > > As I recall, David was in similar denial when some > of us informed him (way, way back) that we'd really > like a TWAIN driver for our Polaroid scanners. > > rafe b. Now, now, poor David must be having some sleepless nights right now, so let's not be too hard on him, eh? I agree that the Polaroid would have made more scanner sales with the an IR dust removal system. What is the unknown is how much they cost to implement, and what ASF charges for the initial services and licensing fees. I think there might be a way to get around some of the softness issues that the current IR dust removal creates, at least in theory (I can't test them because I don't write code). And although I agree with David that IR treatments do soften scans, sometimes that's a reasonable compromise, especially with judicious use of USM. Art
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Lawrence, Did the SS120 shut off again. How often has it happened. If you still have it I certainly can get you a new one. David -Original Message- From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 3:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED All, Well, my replacement 8000 just arrived and it's DOA. The mechanism that grads the slide trays is totally dead. Some much for this unit. I'm on hold with tech support even as we speak. The Imacon is looking better and better. My SS120 shut itself off, my other 8000 had banding problems, this one is dead on arrival. What's next? These things totally suck. . Well, I just got off the phone with support and they are sending me a tag to ship the unit in to service. I'd like to take it out to a public place and take a 12 gauge to it piece of s@#t (sorry about the language) Lawrence
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > > Someone has angered the Scanner Gods. I think it was Art. ;-) Jeez, I thought Art *was* the Scanner God. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
LOL . I needed a good laugh! Thanks :-) Lawrence > > Your "karma" is really bad this week, Lawrence. Did you run over > a squirel > and forget to pray for its soul, or what? > > OTOH, if you're an Aries, my week has gone sorta like that (last > week more > than this week, and the month before was even worse!). If it > isn't karma and > it isn't Astrology and it isn't the Moon in its many phases, what's > left--Magic? > > Someone has angered the Scanner Gods. I think it was Art. ;-) > > Best regards, and all meant in good fun--LRA > > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
OK... it is working now. I shut it on and off several times and rebooted my computer and suddenly it is feeding the trays. I am scanning an image to see if it will have banding problems... will let you know! Lawrence > > Well, my replacement 8000 just arrived and it's DOA. The mechanism that > grads the slide trays is totally dead. Some much for this unit. I'm on > hold with tech support even as we speak. The Imacon is looking better and > better. My SS120 shut itself off, my other 8000 had banding > problems, this > one is dead on arrival. What's next? These things totally suck. . > Well, I just got off the phone with support and they are sending > me a tag to > ship the unit in to service. I'd like to take it out to a public > place and > take a 12 gauge to it piece of s@#t (sorry about the language) > > > Lawrence >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Your "karma" is really bad this week, Lawrence. Did you run over a squirel and forget to pray for its soul, or what? OTOH, if you're an Aries, my week has gone sorta like that (last week more than this week, and the month before was even worse!). If it isn't karma and it isn't Astrology and it isn't the Moon in its many phases, what's left--Magic? Someone has angered the Scanner Gods. I think it was Art. ;-) Best regards, and all meant in good fun--LRA >From: "Lawrence Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED >Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 15:06:17 -0400 > >All, > >Well, my replacement 8000 just arrived and it's DOA. The mechanism that >grads the slide trays is totally dead. Some much for this unit. I'm on >hold with tech support even as we speak. The Imacon is looking better and >better. My SS120 shut itself off, my other 8000 had banding problems, this >one is dead on arrival. What's next? These things totally suck. . >Well, I just got off the phone with support and they are sending me a tag >to >ship the unit in to service. I'd like to take it out to a public place and >take a 12 gauge to it piece of s@#t (sorry about the language) > > >Lawrence > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
All, Well, my replacement 8000 just arrived and it's DOA. The mechanism that grads the slide trays is totally dead. Some much for this unit. I'm on hold with tech support even as we speak. The Imacon is looking better and better. My SS120 shut itself off, my other 8000 had banding problems, this one is dead on arrival. What's next? These things totally suck. . Well, I just got off the phone with support and they are sending me a tag to ship the unit in to service. I'd like to take it out to a public place and take a 12 gauge to it piece of s@#t (sorry about the language) Lawrence
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
ICE denial Hmmm. Hardly, Although I do not like the effects of dust removal filters whether hardware or software based, do not use them when doing any of my personal scans, I do wish we had it for no other reason than to use its perceived value to sell more scanners. Surprisingly when talking to potential customers at dealers and trade shows there are very few who straddle the fence on this issue. They either would not be without it or say they it's not worth the negative effects on the image. The customers viewing ICE negatively are decidedly in the medium format camp as opposed to 35mm customers. In my view there are many features to consider when purchasing a scanner and dust and scratch removal is only one of the options to consider All that said there is more than one way to skin that dust and scratch cat! David -Original Message- From: rafeb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED At 12:50 AM 7/12/01 -0700, Art wrote: >Visible light does not need to be an LED source for dICE to work. Acer >2740 uses a hybrid situation, with an IR LED, but cold cathode light >source. Canon FS 4000 has FARE, which is also an infrared defect repair >system and is not, to my knowledge using an LED visible lighting >system. Finally, the Minolta Elite doesn't use an LED visible lighting >source, and it also has dICE. I think the cheapest way to provide good >IR is an LED array, but it doesn't seem to preclude use of cold cathode >for the rest of the lighting. You raise some interesting points here, Art. Clearly there are hybrid solutions that get around the design compromise that I cited. But curiously, our man from Polaroid is in ICE-denial, saying that his (perceived) clientele doesn't value ICE. Nor did I, until I had a chance to work with it. As I recall, David was in similar denial when some of us informed him (way, way back) that we'd really like a TWAIN driver for our Polaroid scanners. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> > Sorry, I should have made it clearer - from what I have read the Nikons > (2000 and 4000) have more noise than the SS4000. Don't believe everything you read or hear. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> I would have said the same thing yesterday, but with the cat out of the > bag about Polaroid's finances, there might be more of a fire sale going > on than a clearance. > One can hope - 5080 dpi, ICE^3, and low noise. Let's not forget cheap.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> What about the ls-4000? > > > > > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the > > SS4000 ($950 > > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > > something soon. > Sorry, I should have made it clearer - from what I have read the Nikons (2000 and 4000) have more noise than the SS4000. I expect (hope?) that either Polaroid or Minolta will come out with a scanner that does what I want in the near future. Minolta just announced a medium format scanner that has everything, when will they do 35 mm version? I am willing to wait another 6 months and see what appears. That will give my credit card time to recover after upgrading my computer system this month. If nothing else appears then I will reconsider the Nikon.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 12:50 AM 7/12/01 -0700, Art wrote: >Visible light does not need to be an LED source for dICE to work. Acer >2740 uses a hybrid situation, with an IR LED, but cold cathode light >source. Canon FS 4000 has FARE, which is also an infrared defect repair >system and is not, to my knowledge using an LED visible lighting >system. Finally, the Minolta Elite doesn't use an LED visible lighting >source, and it also has dICE. I think the cheapest way to provide good >IR is an LED array, but it doesn't seem to preclude use of cold cathode >for the rest of the lighting. You raise some interesting points here, Art. Clearly there are hybrid solutions that get around the design compromise that I cited. But curiously, our man from Polaroid is in ICE-denial, saying that his (perceived) clientele doesn't value ICE. Nor did I, until I had a chance to work with it. As I recall, David was in similar denial when some of us informed him (way, way back) that we'd really like a TWAIN driver for our Polaroid scanners. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
"Shough, Dean" wrote: > > > I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the > same functionality. > > > > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon. I would have said the same thing yesterday, but with the cat out of the bag about Polaroid's finances, there might be more of a fire sale going on than a clearance. Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > At 07:09 11-07-01 -0400, I wrote: > >It was admittedly difficult for me to be objective because of prior bad > experiences with an LS4000 > >and Nikon technical support. From list feedback it seems that times have > changed for the better to > >some degree. I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if > it had the same > >functionality. > > I can't type today at all:-( > > I meant to type "prior bad experiences with an LS1000" which changes the > entire meaning of the statement. > That was an easy mistake to make, and I automatically translated it, cause I recall you had been speaking about your LS1000 previously. Thanks for your explanation. As scanners get higher res, IR clean up is becoming more useful. Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
rafeb wrote: > > However... there IS a price to pay, and it gets back > to the LEDs vs. cold-cathode lighting issue, I think. > > If I'm not mistaken, ICE requires IR-LED illumination. > The Nikons have this, the Polaroids don't. But it > also seems that shallow depth-of-focus may be a side- > effect of LED illumination, at least according to one > of theories floating around. To wit: the LEDs are > less bright than cold-cathode, hence wider apertures > (and lower depth-of-focus) in the internal optics. > Visible light does not need to be an LED source for dICE to work. Acer 2740 uses a hybrid situation, with an IR LED, but cold cathode light source. Canon FS 4000 has FARE, which is also an infrared defect repair system and is not, to my knowledge using an LED visible lighting system. Finally, the Minolta Elite doesn't use an LED visible lighting source, and it also has dICE. I think the cheapest way to provide good IR is an LED array, but it doesn't seem to preclude use of cold cathode for the rest of the lighting. Art
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Off topic :) David -Original Message- From: Gerry Kaslowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 3:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED or they file for bankruptcy - Original Message - From: Shough, Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 11:32 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the > same functionality. > > > > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon. >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Polaroid Secures Loan Extensions, Plans to Explore Merger or Sale A WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE News Roundup Polaroid Corp. said Wednesday it would explore a merger or sale as the camera and film maker tries to dig out from beneath a mountain of debt. The company announced a waiver on a $363 million line of credit that was set to expire Thursday, but said it would miss payments to bond holders next month. In a statement, Polaroid said it had retained Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein and Merrill Lynch to explore several options for the future of the company, including "sale of assets, a merger, a sale of the company and/or a strategic partnership." Polaroid said its banks agreed to extend certain loan covenants through Oct. 12. The company also received a waiver of a $19 million principal repayment that had been scheduled for September. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Raphael Bustin > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 6:15 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > > On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Lawrence Smith wrote: > > > Here's the latest. My SS120 is on it's way back to the > vendor for a refund. > > I am getting another 8000 tomorrow to try. Hopefully the > banding issue will > > be solved with this new one. It must be said that I REALLY > like the SS120. > > I was getting superb scans for the most part. I did have a > slide that gave > > me fits trying to get focused using silverfast and finally > had to scan it > > with polacolor to get it sharp. That was very strange. As > it turns out, I > > was finding that I was spending as much time doing final dust > spotting in > > the scans as the Nikon with ICE took to do it's job with > essentially no > > spotting required. That means that I could do other > productive work while > > the scanner was doing it's ICE magic. Kind of like having an > assistant to > > help. If I do not have any banding problem (or other show > stoppers) with > > the 8000 then I intend to keep it and get Silverfast when it becomes > > available. The best of both worlds as far as I can tell. > This latest news > > about Polaroid's financial health was also a factor in my > trying another > > 8000. I have enough problems without my scanner manufacturer > going belly > > up > > > > Lawrence > > > In all fairness, I suspect Polaroid will > find some way to continue operations. > Maybe they'll just get bought out and > assimilated into some new mega upstart. > > Polaroid's sort of a Boston icon. They'll > find a way. > > Sad to see American manufacturing concerns > in such a sad state. > > > rafe b. >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> BTW, a few times the >> Silverfast software has not recognized my scanner, but then I start up >> Polaroid's software, and then try it with Silverfast's again and it does >> recognize it. Next time it happens I'm going to contact Silverfast with the >> details. (I'm working on a Macintosh G4). As with the Nikon version of SilverFast AI LaserSoft need to use parts of Insight core driver. Sometimes when SilverFast falls over; usually when you change film format or the preferences get corrupted. The only way round it is to start Insight and all the problems clear. Don't remove Insight or SilverFast will scream its head off. I'm not sure why they didn't bundle the relevant files with SilverFast as they do with the version for Nikon units (they supply about 70% of NikonScan (maid file and all the profiles) as a second install that overwrites the original) Ian Lyons http://www.computer-darkroom.com
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
I think so too rafe. I can't really imagine them disappearing. But it does bring a certain amount of uncertainty to the issue. As for the machines, it was really a toss up. They are both great. Lawrence > > In all fairness, I suspect Polaroid will > find some way to continue operations. > Maybe they'll just get bought out and > assimilated into some new mega upstart. > > Polaroid's sort of a Boston icon. They'll > find a way. > > Sad to see American manufacturing concerns > in such a sad state. > > > rafe b. >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Lawrence Smith wrote: > Here's the latest. My SS120 is on it's way back to the vendor for a refund. > I am getting another 8000 tomorrow to try. Hopefully the banding issue will > be solved with this new one. It must be said that I REALLY like the SS120. > I was getting superb scans for the most part. I did have a slide that gave > me fits trying to get focused using silverfast and finally had to scan it > with polacolor to get it sharp. That was very strange. As it turns out, I > was finding that I was spending as much time doing final dust spotting in > the scans as the Nikon with ICE took to do it's job with essentially no > spotting required. That means that I could do other productive work while > the scanner was doing it's ICE magic. Kind of like having an assistant to > help. If I do not have any banding problem (or other show stoppers) with > the 8000 then I intend to keep it and get Silverfast when it becomes > available. The best of both worlds as far as I can tell. This latest news > about Polaroid's financial health was also a factor in my trying another > 8000. I have enough problems without my scanner manufacturer going belly > up > > Lawrence In all fairness, I suspect Polaroid will find some way to continue operations. Maybe they'll just get bought out and assimilated into some new mega upstart. Polaroid's sort of a Boston icon. They'll find a way. Sad to see American manufacturing concerns in such a sad state. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Here's the latest. My SS120 is on it's way back to the vendor for a refund. I am getting another 8000 tomorrow to try. Hopefully the banding issue will be solved with this new one. It must be said that I REALLY like the SS120. I was getting superb scans for the most part. I did have a slide that gave me fits trying to get focused using silverfast and finally had to scan it with polacolor to get it sharp. That was very strange. As it turns out, I was finding that I was spending as much time doing final dust spotting in the scans as the Nikon with ICE took to do it's job with essentially no spotting required. That means that I could do other productive work while the scanner was doing it's ICE magic. Kind of like having an assistant to help. If I do not have any banding problem (or other show stoppers) with the 8000 then I intend to keep it and get Silverfast when it becomes available. The best of both worlds as far as I can tell. This latest news about Polaroid's financial health was also a factor in my trying another 8000. I have enough problems without my scanner manufacturer going belly up Lawrence > > Hey, Lawrence, how are you making out with the SS120? I'm liking mine > better and better, now that Ian's giving me a few additional > pointers on the > SilverFast software. I am a bit concerned about Polaroid's economic > problems and support; hopefully they'll sell a bunch of them so > someone will > continue supporting the scanners . . . > > > something soon.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Hey, Lawrence, how are you making out with the SS120? I'm liking mine better and better, now that Ian's giving me a few additional pointers on the SilverFast software. I am a bit concerned about Polaroid's economic problems and support; hopefully they'll sell a bunch of them so someone will continue supporting the scanners . . . The only feature I really am missing is digital ice, . . . how about you? Have you fixed your problems with the scanner? BTW, a few times the Silverfast software has not recognized my scanner, but then I start up Polaroid's software, and then try it with Silverfast's again and it does recognize it. Next time it happens I'm going to contact Silverfast with the details. (I'm working on a Macintosh G4). I've noticed that the scanner accentuates the grain (in Velvia) especially in low density (overexposed) areas of the slides much more than the Tango drum scans I've been getting. What's weird is that I could swear its accentuated more in the medium format than 35 mm slides I've scanned. Maybe it has to do with the development procedure? My lab for medium format may be doing something to increase contrast? . . . From what I've read, Nikon's LED light source would accentuate grain even more than the SS120, so I guess there's no tradeoff there. Howard. -Original Message- From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 11:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED What about the ls-4000? > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the > SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Shough, Dean wrote: > > I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the > same functionality. > > > > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon. That would be the Nikon 4000 ED, no? rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
or they file for bankruptcy - Original Message - From: Shough, Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 11:32 AM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the > same functionality. > > > > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon. >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
What about the ls-4000? > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm > slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the > SS4000 ($950 > according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect > something soon.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the same functionality. > I am waiting for Polaroid (or someone else) to release a 4000+dpi 35 mm slide scanner with ICE^3. Looking at the current prices on the SS4000 ($950 according to CNET) and the $200 rebate currently being offered, I expect something soon.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 07:09 11-07-01 -0400, I wrote: >It was admittedly difficult for me to be objective because of prior bad experiences with an LS4000 >and Nikon technical support. From list feedback it seems that times have changed for the better to >some degree. I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the same >functionality. I can't type today at all:-( I meant to type "prior bad experiences with an LS1000" which changes the entire meaning of the statement. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.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
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 10:31 PM 7/10/01 -0700, Art wrote: >It sounds to me that this is a heads up to companies like Polaroid and >others that it might well me worthwhile to consider production of at >least one scanner line with D-ICE or equivalent type products with an >infrared channel. "ICE" was a non-issue for me in choosing the 8000 ED. I assumed that ICE was some sort of dumb gimmick and that image quality would suffer from using it. I'm happy to say that I was quite wrong about this. In fact, when I consider the countless hours I've spent in the last few years spotting and retouching scans, I kinda kick myself... However... there IS a price to pay, and it gets back to the LEDs vs. cold-cathode lighting issue, I think. If I'm not mistaken, ICE requires IR-LED illumination. The Nikons have this, the Polaroids don't. But it also seems that shallow depth-of-focus may be a side- effect of LED illumination, at least according to one of theories floating around. To wit: the LEDs are less bright than cold-cathode, hence wider apertures (and lower depth-of-focus) in the internal optics. It would be interesting to put this to the test, somehow, perhaps with deliberately bent or curved media. Shallow depth of focus *is* an issue on the 8000, when scanning 645. I have to be extremely careful loading the filmstrips in their holders to ensure that they're quite flat. It's often a hit-and-miss thing. Not so much an issue on 35 mm filmstrips. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 22:31 10-07-01 -0700, you wrote: >"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > On 10-04-98 I posted the following to this list: > > "Let's not forget the corollary to that expression is "with Nikon you don't > > get what you pay for." By that I mean customer support. I learned that > > unhappy lesson with my first film scanner, a Nikon LS1000 when I > > encountered nothing but arrogance, stalling, and ignorance from Nikon > > "support." It's quite the opposite with Polaroid and probably would be with > > Canon also. Naturally I'll be looking forward to evaluations of the Canon > > unit by Ed and Tony but I'm quite sure that I'd never buy from Nikon > again." > >Your last sentence sound pretty unequivocal. I guess my question to you >would be this: > >What is it that changed in terms of your perception of Nikon customer >service in the last 3 years that leads you to believe things have >improved with them? Or have you decided instead to allow the product >niche the LS-4000 offers to outstrip whatever concerns you have about >dealing with Nikon customer service? Yes, basically the latter was my reasoning. I've been following the list discussions about 4000dpi scanners for a long time. There hasn't been a host of reports about LS4000 hardware problems. Having worked in the software industry for a long time I basically expected that version "point.zero" of NikonScan would be buggy. Ultimately my decision was based on how well ICE, ROC and GEM worked because I needed all three features. And I always had Vuescan as a fallback if NikonScan was a complete bust which it wasn't. It was admittedly difficult for me to be objective because of prior bad experiences with an LS4000 and Nikon technical support. From list feedback it seems that times have changed for the better to some degree. I'd have bought a Polaroid SS4000 in the blink of an eye if it had the same functionality. >It sounds to me that this is a heads up to companies like Polaroid and >others that it might well me worthwhile to consider production of at >least one scanner line with D-ICE or equivalent type products with an >infrared channel. > > > Last month, I bought the Nikon LS-4000 for its ICE, GEM and ROC features, > > all of which I needed badly for the restoration work that I do on contract. > > I just can't spend so many hours spotting crappy old neglected film that > > customers expect me to rescue when the Nikon does most of it automatically. > > Those features are fantastic time savers because they work so well. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.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
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > On 10-04-98 I posted the following to this list: > "Let's not forget the corollary to that expression is "with Nikon you don't > get what you pay for." By that I mean customer support. I learned that > unhappy lesson with my first film scanner, a Nikon LS1000 when I > encountered nothing but arrogance, stalling, and ignorance from Nikon > "support." It's quite the opposite with Polaroid and probably would be with > Canon also. Naturally I'll be looking forward to evaluations of the Canon > unit by Ed and Tony but I'm quite sure that I'd never buy from Nikon again." Your last sentence sound pretty unequivocal. I guess my question to you would be this: What is it that changed in terms of your perception of Nikon customer service in the last 3 years that leads you to believe things have improved with them? Or have you decided instead to allow the product niche the LS-4000 offers to outstrip whatever concerns you have about dealing with Nikon customer service? It sounds to me that this is a heads up to companies like Polaroid and others that it might well me worthwhile to consider production of at least one scanner line with D-ICE or equivalent type products with an infrared channel. Art > Last month, I bought the Nikon LS-4000 for its ICE, GEM and ROC features, > all of which I needed badly for the restoration work that I do on contract. > I just can't spend so many hours spotting crappy old neglected film that > customers expect me to rescue when the Nikon does most of it automatically. > Those features are fantastic time savers because they work so well. >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Unfortunately Sir is broke and has no money. He was only enthusiastically supporting the notion of *factual* comparative information of reasonable validity as a means of choosing between scanners. As opposed to trying to do it based on opinion, unverifiable comparisons and manufacturer's claims. (It was by the way the search for good quality data that explains how he came to find this list in the first place after being drawn to your reviews). I do hope to be in a position to buy a scanner sometime in the next year or so and it is for this that I enthusiastically devour good comparative info. While I agree with many comments that the 8000 and 120 are obviously very similar in what can be achieved with each, I believe there are probably a few characteristics that might make you choose one over the other, specifically - ultimate resolution, focus-ability over the whole film, grain visibility, shadow detail...and dust/scratch visibility and correction. But maybe even these are into diminishing returns already.. Julian PS as well as the software you'd need the same images at each scanner location no? At 11:34 10/07/01, you wrote: >On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:13:54 +1000 Julian Robinson >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > - when you see something in one and can directly try it on the > > other,or tweek one to match the other. > >What's needed is a PC Anywhere/VNC/Carbon Copy remote control of a range >of scanners. Then you could do this from anywhere. > >How much would Sir wish to pay for such a service? :) > >Regards > >Tony Sleep >http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner >info & comparisons Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 12:13:54 +1000 Julian Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > - when you see something in one and can directly try it on the > other,or tweek one to match the other. What's needed is a PC Anywhere/VNC/Carbon Copy remote control of a range of scanners. Then you could do this from anywhere. How much would Sir wish to pay for such a service? :) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
- Original Message - From: Arthur Entlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 6:15 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > "Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > > >I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. > > >I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those > > >environs... > > > > Is my residence in the "Deep South" some sort of problem for you? > > > > I've been in Georgia for three years and lived in the Pacific NW before > > that--right near you. I neither know nor care where Nikon makes its > > hardware. I don't use their cameras either as I prefer Canon. Let's keep > > regional biases out of this diverse international list and keep the level > > of discussion on a professional level. > My musing was based upon two posts, yours, and the one a few days > earlier by Ray (Greensboro, NC) who was very concerned that Nikon not be > "slandered" by Claudiu when he called Nikonscan "garbage" software. As > I stated before, there is something about Nikon film scanner owners that > makes them guard their reputation like a mother bear does her cubs. What a bunch of horse poopie Art. Your ad hominem attacks on Nikon test my patience, and apparently others here feel the same way. Nikon makes some of the best CCD scanners for photographers extant, period, end of story. True, they're not for everyone and they're not perfect. So what else is new? It's been suggested you give it a rest. I second the motion. Dave
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 15:15 09-07-01 -0700, Arthur Entlich wrote: >"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > > >I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. > > >I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those > > >environs... > > > > Is my residence in the "Deep South" some sort of problem for you? > > > > I've been in Georgia for three years and lived in the Pacific NW before > > that--right near you. I neither know nor care where Nikon makes its > > hardware. I don't use their cameras either as I prefer Canon. Let's keep > > regional biases out of this diverse international list and keep the level > > of discussion on a professional level. > >My musing was based upon two posts, yours, and the one a few days >earlier by Ray (Greensboro, NC) who was very concerned that Nikon not be >"slandered" by Claudiu when he called Nikonscan "garbage" software. As >I stated before, there is something about Nikon film scanner owners that >makes them guard their reputation like a mother bear does her cubs. > >Other than some Leaf owners, I haven't seen the owners of any other >brand have the need or desire to be so defensive of the scanners they >are using. On 10-04-98 I posted the following to this list: "Let's not forget the corollary to that expression is "with Nikon you don't get what you pay for." By that I mean customer support. I learned that unhappy lesson with my first film scanner, a Nikon LS1000 when I encountered nothing but arrogance, stalling, and ignorance from Nikon "support." It's quite the opposite with Polaroid and probably would be with Canon also. Naturally I'll be looking forward to evaluations of the Canon unit by Ed and Tony but I'm quite sure that I'd never buy from Nikon again." I dunno. Does that seem defensive to you? Last month, I bought the Nikon LS-4000 for its ICE, GEM and ROC features, all of which I needed badly for the restoration work that I do on contract. I just can't spend so many hours spotting crappy old neglected film that customers expect me to rescue when the Nikon does most of it automatically. Those features are fantastic time savers because they work so well. I'm obviously not attached to a brand name and try to overcome any biases *including* my own as the above quote illustrates. NikonScan is rather slow compared to Vuescan but it has a beautiful interface, great functionality and is easy to use. This doesn't mean that there's anything *wrong* with any competitive brand--just that the Nikon happens to fit *my* particular needs. My last scanner was a Polaroid SS35+. But it was time to upgrade and important to be objective and unbiased when doing a needs analysis. I read the posts about various 4000 dpi products here, looked at the samples, made some live tests in Atlanta and made a good unhurried decision based on that. Jerking people around because of where they choose to live is unproductive and ridiculous. I bought five acres of paradise here in rural Georgia that would have cost me way more than ten times as much back home in Washington state. Finally, you wrote "My musing was based upon two posts." That's not much of a statistical sampling, is it? Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.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
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > >I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. > >I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those > >environs... > > Is my residence in the "Deep South" some sort of problem for you? > > I've been in Georgia for three years and lived in the Pacific NW before > that--right near you. I neither know nor care where Nikon makes its > hardware. I don't use their cameras either as I prefer Canon. Let's keep > regional biases out of this diverse international list and keep the level > of discussion on a professional level. > My musing was based upon two posts, yours, and the one a few days earlier by Ray (Greensboro, NC) who was very concerned that Nikon not be "slandered" by Claudiu when he called Nikonscan "garbage" software. As I stated before, there is something about Nikon film scanner owners that makes them guard their reputation like a mother bear does her cubs. Other than some Leaf owners, I haven't seen the owners of any other brand have the need or desire to be so defensive of the scanners they are using. Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 02:04 AM 7/9/01 -0700, Art Entlich wrote: >I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. >I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those >environs... More witty observations from Brother Art, who doesn't even live in the USA. Allegiance based on geography is what Kurt Vonnegut calls a "granfalloon." Art, it might interest you that I live in a suburb of Boston, MA, which is where Polaroid's factories are. Yes, that same Polaroid which, just a few weeks ago, announced layoffs of 25% of their workforce. Last I checked, it was a long way from here to North Carolina. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 02:04 09-07-01 -0700, Arthur Entlich wrote: >"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > > > >>The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000 and wipes the floor > > >>with the 4000ED. If the 8000 scans anything like the 4000ED then I'm real > > >>sorry for you Nikon users. The SS120 comes mighty close to Imacon quality > > > > Comments like the one quoted above don't really add anything useful to the > > list's dialog. > >I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. >I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those >environs... Is my residence in the "Deep South" some sort of problem for you? I've been in Georgia for three years and lived in the Pacific NW before that--right near you. I neither know nor care where Nikon makes its hardware. I don't use their cameras either as I prefer Canon. Let's keep regional biases out of this diverse international list and keep the level of discussion on a professional level. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.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
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
"Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)" wrote: > > >>The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000 and wipes the floor > >>with the 4000ED. If the 8000 scans anything like the 4000ED then I'm real > >>sorry for you Nikon users. The SS120 comes mighty close to Imacon quality > > Comments like the one quoted above don't really add anything useful to the > list's dialog. > I'm musing whether Nikon has a factory in the "deep south" of the US. I'm noting a very strong allegiance to the company coming from those environs... Art
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> > I dream of someone > > being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners > >Patience, dear boy, patience!... :) > >Regards > >Tony Sleep Really? Now I *am* excited - although the thing that most appeals to me is the ability of some lucky bugger to have the comparison scanners at the same place at the same time because it enables a much more direct comparison - - when you see something in one and can directly try it on the other,or tweek one to match the other. Waiting... keenly Julian Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Ouch! Yes it was the spell checker, with my help. I like the often quoted "useful phrase" from an old French text book - which was - "Lo! the postilion has been struck by lightning!" Very handy in so many situations, Julian At 02:07 08/07/01, you wrote: >On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote: > > > > being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners > - LS4000, > > > > ...don't you just love it when the spell checker does that? It just > reminds me > > how difficult it is to get good postilions these days. > > > > > >___>Since the invention of the horsely carriage, "postilion" is a word >that seldom is heard. Probably if at all by people who set up funerals for >heads of state etc. Otherwise, a carriage with two or four horses with >riders on the horses is not seen much and probably was seldom seen even >when horse drawn conveyances were in style. Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
>>The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000 and wipes the floor >>with the 4000ED. If the 8000 scans anything like the 4000ED then I'm real >>sorry for you Nikon users. The SS120 comes mighty close to Imacon quality Comments like the one quoted above don't really add anything useful to the list's dialog. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.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
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Ian I think you shall try LS4000 with Silverfast before a judgment like this. Or was your comparision including Silverfast 5.2 1 rev04 ?? Mikael Risedal >The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000 and wipes the floor >with the 4000ED. If the 8000 scans anything like the 4000ED then I'm real >sorry for you Nikon users. The SS120 comes mighty close to Imacon quality >From: Ian Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED >Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 19:44:28 +0100 > >Rafe, > > > Curious silence from > > the "other" camp. > > >If SS120 users came to list singing its praises every day you would smell a >rat and call for the exterminator :-) > >You can only coverup a problem for so long and I've had the the SS120 >longer >than most, namely April. It doesn't suffer any of the problems the Nikon >seems to suffer, i.e. banding, unstable software, poor depth of field, etc. >There are also a hell of a lot more SS120's in the field than 8000's. I >don't here much screaming for level 2 tech support and as you have already >noted they are whining here either :-) > > >The only problems I find with the S120 were reported to the list and other >forums long before the 8000ED even hit the streets. See >http://phi.res.cse.dmu.ac.uk/Filmscan/2001/Jun/0209.html > >David Hemingway has also commented on these problems here and elsewhere. >Talking of company representatives I'm still trying to figure which stone >the Nikon guys hide under :-) > >SS120 Problems or Disadvantages: > >The SS120 the 35mm strip film holder is of poor design and needs fixed. It >is too damned fiddly. See the above linked message for my other thoughts on >film carrier problems. > >You mention workarounds, well the SS120 requires one also. Medium format >camera makers can't agree the distance between frames so we end up with >some >frames out of line on prescan. This happens more with 645 format than other >sizes. The workaround is set the software for 6 by 9 and overscan. Time >penalty, about 30 seconds per scan! Hint to David, with a bit of thought >this could be turned to a MAJOR advantage - full size single scan >panoramas. > >One of Nikons big selling points is ICE Cubed - Well given sufficient heat >ICE will melt. I don't think Polaroid have a problem beating the Nikon in >terms of hardware and overall scan quality, but the customer wants ICE and >that they can't deliver, yet. Although, stranger things have happened. > >I'll keep looking for other problems, but it's getting awfully difficult >:-) > > > >A few Pluses: > > >The SS120 produces superior 35mm scans to the SS4000 and wipes the floor >with the 4000ED. If the 8000 scans anything like the 4000ED then I'm real >sorry for you Nikon users. The SS120 comes mighty close to Imacon quality >when scanning anything up to 6 by 9, but the Imacon costs 4 or 5 times the >price. > >Shadow detail is excellent. Scans are very neutral right off. Noise levels >are very low and multisample scans aren't necessary. > >Insight 5 (and I don't like it) allows the user to scan, edit and >export/save images in high Bit mode. Does NikonScan 3 allow this? > > > > > >Ian Lyons >http://www.computer-darkroom.com > >PS: I think the silence has just been broken, or maybe as a VERY satisfied >SS120 user I just needed to crow and let you Nikon users know that the >grass >IS greener on the other side of the fence and judging by some of ex Nikon >8000 users on the list; the ICE has already began to melt > _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Re Lawrence's scans, I also noted that the Nikon scan was much "flatter" in color and overall tone--but did not comment, hoping that wiser, more experienced heads would do so. Bear in mind that Lawrence said the Nikon scan more resembled the original (at least as he saw it--he didn't mention a Macbeth or anything, but the guy's a pro and he knows what he's doing, quite obviously). Since no one has done, my off-hand observation is that the SS120, showing warmer colors and better contrast, took the software initiative, as it were, to change the photo to a more "acceptable" and "therefore better" image. Could the user "flatten" the SS120 scan to the level of the 8000ED scan with the *exact* level of detail? I don't know. Shadow detail doesn't seem to be lacking in the SS scan, but highlight detail might be something to look at more closely in future tests. Is the digital information still there, or has it been discarded? Rafe's comments (in his post after this one) were very much "on the mark" IMHO. The two scanners (or three, considering the Leaf), are comparable, and it becomes a matter of "take your pick and flip a coin" to decide, and longevity is certainly a factor. One photog I remember extolled the virtues of a Rolei that he lost down a rocky embankment and recovered in perfect working order--although the exterior was a bit scuffed! Almost nobody makes machines like that, anymore. ;-) Best regards--LRA >From: Raphael Bustin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > > > It's clear to me that ICE "nailed" a couple of dust motes in the bottle > > lettering, and that the Nikon scan is marginally sharper. But if the >theme > > is "Italy," the warmer tones of the SprintScan come closest (even if the > > original didn't). This, of course, is "happy accident"--if the theme >were > > "Yelow Knife, Canada," the roles might be reversed. :-) > > > > As Lawrence said on his site, the judgement is largly subjective, and so > > it's your call. > > >The only objective, meaningful comparison here >is -- maybe -- the sharpness. > >Even here it's quite possible that a small >difference in tonality, in just the right >place, could account for the apparent difference >in sharpness of the close-up views. > >In any case, since I'm still hanging in with >the filmscanner that Lawrence just ditched, >it's a relief to see that the 8000 is well >matched to the LS-120, at least as far as >this comparison goes. > > >rafe b. > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote: > > being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners - LS4000, > > ...don't you just love it when the spell checker does that? It just reminds me > how difficult it is to get good postilions these days. > > ___>Since the invention of the horsely carriage, "postilion" is a word that seldom is heard. Probably if at all by people who set up funerals for heads of state etc. Otherwise, a carriage with two or four horses with riders on the horses is not seen much and probably was seldom seen even when horse drawn conveyances were in style.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Sat, 7 Jul 2001 11:27:01 +0100 Jawed Ashraf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > CMYK->LAB->CMYK isn't innocuous as far as I know, but that's mostly to > do > with the fact that CMYK is "broken" isn't it (any conversion to CMYK is > going to "lose" quality)? If someone has a source of detailed info on > this, > I'd be fascinated to read some more. It is just that CMYK has a smaller gamut than RGB spaces. Like pouring a quart into a pint pot, if you pour it back again you can't reclaim the surplus. The RGB values will be a subset of the original RGB values, just the colours which fitted inside CMYK. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Sat, 07 Jul 2001 11:52:17 +1000 Julian Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I dream of someone > being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners Patience, dear boy, patience!... :) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001 15:50:48 -0400 Wilson, Paul ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > The Nikon does seem marginally sharper but the Polaroid seems to have = > better > shadow detail (lower right side of the uncropped shot). It's hard to tell, since exposure and contrast vary between the two - the Polaroid looks just slightly 'hot' and magenta. Both should be easily correctable. The Nikon does look to have a slight sharpness advantage, but whether this is maintained across the frame seems to be a matter of much debate. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners - LS4000, ...don't you just love it when the spell checker does that? It just reminds me how difficult it is to get good postilions these days.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Well, actually, since USM is about the last thing I do to an image (hmm, I hardly ever use it), it seems quite reasonable to go to 8 bits then do USM and finalise. RGB->LAB->RGB is innocuous, though, isn't it? CMYK->LAB->CMYK isn't innocuous as far as I know, but that's mostly to do with the fact that CMYK is "broken" isn't it (any conversion to CMYK is going to "lose" quality)? If someone has a source of detailed info on this, I'd be fascinated to read some more. Jawed > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert E. Wright > Sent: 07 July 2001 05:56 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > Well, that brings up a whole new subject. Since your are going to > convert to > 8 bit mode for final output, I think that better than doing Mode changes, > although I'm not put out much by that either. Such discussions (16 bit > editing vs 8 bit, and mode changes back and forth) are too much theory and > to little actual perception in the image. > > Bob > - Original Message - > From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 4:48 PM > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > Ah, you have to be in 8-bit mode to do the fade - something I avoid like > the > > plague... Still that's nice, PS making a virtual layer for you for the > last > > operation. Hmm... > > > > Jawed
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Well, that brings up a whole new subject. Since your are going to convert to 8 bit mode for final output, I think that better than doing Mode changes, although I'm not put out much by that either. Such discussions (16 bit editing vs 8 bit, and mode changes back and forth) are too much theory and to little actual perception in the image. Bob - Original Message - From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 4:48 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > Ah, you have to be in 8-bit mode to do the fade - something I avoid like the > plague... Still that's nice, PS making a virtual layer for you for the last > operation. Hmm... > > Jawed > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert E. Wright > > Sent: 06 July 2001 18:58 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:31 PM > > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > > > > David, when using Photoshop, if you convert the image to LAB mode > > > (Image|Mode|Lab Color) then you will find that you can USM in the > > Lightness > > > channel without touching colour. Then convert back to RGB or CMYK when > > > you're done. > > > > > > Jawed > > > > > True, but avoid the mode change by Fading the USM filter choosing > > Luminosity > > as the mode. > > > > Bob > > > > > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Re Lawrence's test scans... At last a direct comparison! Thank you Lawrence - excellent comparison scans considering it is your first day. The things I guess we are looking for are sharpness, focus, and shadow and highlight detail - I don't think you can really draw any conclusions about contrast or colour from such a test. Both of these are so affected by how you set up the scanner, and both can in any case be adjusted within a wide range by PS. To me - the Nikon clearly wins on sharpness, but the label you show (is it at 1:1?) is in the center of the image - I'd like to see a full 4000dpi crop from the image corners. What size is the neg? It seems that there is some kind of grain visible on the 120 more than the 4000 (label crop), but this depends on if it is a full-res crop. If so that surprises me. But it may be texture on the label, in which case it would make the 120 more successful, unless again that is only because of its higher contrast setting. Is it possible to post a Nikon scan but without using the 16x multiscan? A single pass comparison might be interesting. Also a crop of the some of the dark wall behind the flowers might show something about shadow detail. As these are set up, the 120 seems to have more shadow detail (from the bottle reflections), and the 8000 has more highlight detail, but I doubt this is anything more than settings. This is the most exciting thing I've seen on this list! I dream of someone being in a postilion to do the same thing for the 35mm scanners - LS4000, IV, Polaroid and Cannon side by side at the same time there must be a just slightly eccentric millionaire out there who wants to do something really really worthwhile? Then again you could just buy me a couple of scanners and I'll do the tests ... Thanks Lawrence, Julian > > -Original Message- > > From: Lawrence Smith > [<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 1:07 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > > > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an > > 8000ED to my site > > at > <http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm>http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > > > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > > > Lawrence > > Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
If a gun was pointed to my head I'd have said the scanners were the other way round (I'm an LS40 owner) as I'm used to what I think of as over-saturated colour from my Nikon. But having said that, the LS40 seems to be exceedingly neutral with slides... Jawed > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rick Decker > Sent: 06 July 2001 19:35 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > More contrast on the Sprintscan..nikon colors and saturation are better > > Lawrence Smith wrote: > > > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an > 8000ED to my site > > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > > > Lawrence > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Ah, you have to be in 8-bit mode to do the fade - something I avoid like the plague... Still that's nice, PS making a virtual layer for you for the last operation. Hmm... Jawed > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert E. Wright > Sent: 06 July 2001 18:58 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > - Original Message - > From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:31 PM > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > David, when using Photoshop, if you convert the image to LAB mode > > (Image|Mode|Lab Color) then you will find that you can USM in the > Lightness > > channel without touching colour. Then convert back to RGB or CMYK when > > you're done. > > > > Jawed > > > True, but avoid the mode change by Fading the USM filter choosing > Luminosity > as the mode. > > Bob > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 03:53 PM 7/6/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote: > I took at look at the detail comparison crops (of the label) in >Photoshop at 1200%. The SS120 has much smoother transitions in colors >(softer?) while the Nikon 8000ED has sharper variations between pixels. I >converted both to greyscale and measured the levels at various points and >the SS120 seems to have slightly higher contrast. Which would explain why >it appears to me that the SS120 shows slightly more grain. Noise levels in >both appear to be quite low - I am green with envy (I expect the jpeg >compression affected both about the same...) /fn-Original Usually, increased contrast yields at least the perception of increased sharpness. If the SS-120 has higher contrast yet has lower apparent sharpness (on the close-up images) that suggests (to me) that the 8000 has much better optical resolution. Not that I'm an unbiased observer . rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED I took at look at the detail comparison crops (of the label) in Photoshop at 1200%. The SS120 has much smoother transitions in colors (softer?) while the Nikon 8000ED has sharper variations between pixels. I converted both to greyscale and measured the levels at various points and the SS120 seems to have slightly higher contrast. Which would explain why it appears to me that the SS120 shows slightly more grain. Noise levels in both appear to be quite low - I am green with envy (I expect the jpeg compression affected both about the same...) /fn -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wilson, PaulSent: Friday, July 06, 2001 1:51 PMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED The Nikon does seem marginally sharper but the Polaroid seems to have better shadow detail (lower right side of the uncropped shot). However, it is a little tough to tell from the small .jpg. Lawrence, I assume you'll post more conclusions when you have them. Unfortunately, my SS120 won't be here until Monday. Paul Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 781-768-2410 Gómez Internet Quality Measurement http://www.gomez.com > -Original Message- > From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 1:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an > 8000ED to my site > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > Lawrence >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Please take a look at how the 2 scanners can read 6x7cm film and sharpness from middle and out against the corner . Is there any difference between the scanners ? Best regards Mikael Risedal >From: "Lawrence Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED >Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:07:19 -0400 > >I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site >at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > >These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > >I am a bit surprised by the results however. > >Lawrence > _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED The Nikon does seem marginally sharper but the Polaroid seems to have better shadow detail (lower right side of the uncropped shot). However, it is a little tough to tell from the small .jpg. Lawrence, I assume you'll post more conclusions when you have them. Unfortunately, my SS120 won't be here until Monday. Paul Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 781-768-2410 Gómez Internet Quality Measurement http://www.gomez.com > -Original Message- > From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 1:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an > 8000ED to my site > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > Lawrence >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: > It's clear to me that ICE "nailed" a couple of dust motes in the bottle > lettering, and that the Nikon scan is marginally sharper. But if the theme > is "Italy," the warmer tones of the SprintScan come closest (even if the > original didn't). This, of course, is "happy accident"--if the theme were > "Yelow Knife, Canada," the roles might be reversed. :-) > > As Lawrence said on his site, the judgement is largly subjective, and so > it's your call. The only objective, meaningful comparison here is -- maybe -- the sharpness. Even here it's quite possible that a small difference in tonality, in just the right place, could account for the apparent difference in sharpness of the close-up views. In any case, since I'm still hanging in with the filmscanner that Lawrence just ditched, it's a relief to see that the 8000 is well matched to the LS-120, at least as far as this comparison goes. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
The Nikons sharpness advantage is primarily in the blue channel, which *could* make it more susceptible to showing noise and film grain. However, both look great and I think either one could be made too look like the other without much trouble. I a have a feeling features (ICE) and accessories (film holders) are what will sway consumers more than scan quality. Looks like they both scan well enough. Though I'd like to see how well each deals with dense BW negs, and deep shadows Todd > It's clear to me that ICE "nailed" a couple of dust motes in the bottle > lettering, and that the Nikon scan is marginally sharper. But if the theme > is "Italy," the warmer tones of the SprintScan come closest (even if the > original didn't). This, of course, is "happy accident"--if the theme were > "Yelow Knife, Canada," the roles might be reversed. :-) > > As Lawrence said on his site, the judgement is largly subjective, and so > it's your call. > > Best regards--LRA > >> From: "Lawrence Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED >> Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:07:19 -0400 >> >> I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site >> at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm >> >> These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples >> >> I am a bit surprised by the results however. >> >> Lawrence >> > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
I was expecting the sprintscan to be a bit sharper. The nikon was using ICE to remove dust etc. and the SS120 does not. Even with the dust removal, the Nikon scan is sharper. This is a bit of a surprise to me. Once again, I must state that this is only one scan and I need to make sure that i have all the setting optimized in Silverfast. I will be doing more tests this weekend. The speed of the SS120 is very good and considering it is a single pass, the scan is quite nice! Lawrence > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Moreno Polloni > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 2:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my > site > > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > What is it that surprises you? >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. What is it that surprises you?
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
More contrast on the Sprintscan..nikon colors and saturation are better Lawrence Smith wrote: > I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site > at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > > These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > > I am a bit surprised by the results however. > > Lawrence
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
- Original Message - From: Jawed Ashraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 6:31 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > David, when using Photoshop, if you convert the image to LAB mode > (Image|Mode|Lab Color) then you will find that you can USM in the Lightness > channel without touching colour. Then convert back to RGB or CMYK when > you're done. > > Jawed > True, but avoid the mode change by Fading the USM filter choosing Luminosity as the mode. Bob
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
It's clear to me that ICE "nailed" a couple of dust motes in the bottle lettering, and that the Nikon scan is marginally sharper. But if the theme is "Italy," the warmer tones of the SprintScan come closest (even if the original didn't). This, of course, is "happy accident"--if the theme were "Yelow Knife, Canada," the roles might be reversed. :-) As Lawrence said on his site, the judgement is largly subjective, and so it's your call. Best regards--LRA >From: "Lawrence Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED >Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:07:19 -0400 > >I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site >at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm > >These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples > >I am a bit surprised by the results however. > >Lawrence > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
I just posted a set of camparison scans by a SS120 and an 8000ED to my site at http://www.lwsphoto.com/scan%20tests.htm These are not a final conclusions, they are simply examples I am a bit surprised by the results however. Lawrence
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Jack Phillips Stated: Paul-- Be sure you check out Digital ROC and Digital GEM as part of your comparison. I've been using Digital ROC on normally exposed images with a wide dynamic range where part of the image I'm interested in is over/under exposed with great results. It is also very helpful on my over/under exposed images (unfortuntately I have too many of these) :(. Also, I can use 400 or 800 speed film and about get the same results as using 100 speed film by applying Digital ROC. It works on black and white images as well. It is really interesting how it removes the noise without blurring the film. I'd like to hear about your experiences too. Jack Phipps Applied Science Fiction Jack, I was wondering is ASF has any intention of unbundling GEM and ROC from the D-ICE cube package, and if they might be made available as add-on software plug ins at some point in the future, or do licensing agreements with your D-ICE licensees not allow for this? Art
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Or apply the USM while in RGB or CMYK, then "Edit-Fade Unsharp Mask-Mode: Luminosity" Maris - Original Message - From: "Jawed Ashraf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 8:31 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED David, when using Photoshop, if you convert the image to LAB mode (Image|Mode|Lab Color) then you will find that you can USM in the Lightness channel without touching colour. Then convert back to RGB or CMYK when you're done. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hemingway, David J Sent: 05 July 2001 23:22 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED Paul, The Sprintscan 120 does not come bundled with any interface cards. I would describe PolaColor Insight as a easy to use, get up and running quickly scanner software. In scanner software nirvana using a scale of 1 through 10 I would say Insight will take you to a 6 or 7. Silverfast is a little harder to use but much more powerful. Its unsharp mask in particular is much better than Photoshop's as it works on luminance only not saturation. It will do things that Insight will never do. I think that the general industry perception is Silverfast and Lino Color are the two best scanner software package's from a power point of view. The Imacon software is also pretty good. ( I do try to stay relatively unbiased). Any further questions feel free to contact be on list or directly. David -Original Message- From: Wilson, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:43 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED My SS120 should also be here by Friday. In fact, I'll have both scanners for the weekend so I'll try to do some good comparisons. If it's as good as everyone says and I save $200 (paid $2600 for the lesser package, paid $2800 for the LS8000), I'll be very happy. Can anyone answer the following?: - What does Binuscan and Silverfast get me over the standard software? - does the SS120 come with a IEEE1394 card? Paul Wilson > -Original Message- > From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 3:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > My 120 is on it's way and I'm going to do some tests over the weekend. > Overall, I'm conviced that the 8000 is not ready for prime > time (although > the Nikon folks would beg to differ). Although ICE is nice, I'm more > interested in the sharpest scans with the best shadow detail > I can get. ICE > ain't going to do that for me. I still have a LS2000 so if I > have nasty 35 > slides, I can use that machine. My medium format slides and negs are > pristine so ICE is less of an issue with them... Will provide my > impressions in a few days. > > Lawrence > > > > > > > If SS120 users came to list singing its praises every day you > > would smell a > > rat and call for the exterminator :-) > > > > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
David, when using Photoshop, if you convert the image to LAB mode (Image|Mode|Lab Color) then you will find that you can USM in the Lightness channel without touching colour. Then convert back to RGB or CMYK when you're done. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hemingway, David J Sent: 05 July 2001 23:22 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED Paul, The Sprintscan 120 does not come bundled with any interface cards. I would describe PolaColor Insight as a easy to use, get up and running quickly scanner software. In scanner software nirvana using a scale of 1 through 10 I would say Insight will take you to a 6 or 7. Silverfast is a little harder to use but much more powerful. Its unsharp mask in particular is much better than Photoshops as it works on luminance only not saturation. It will do things that Insight will never do. I think that the general industry perception is Silverfast and Lino Color are the two best scanner software packages from a power point of view. The Imacon software is also pretty good. ( I do try to stay relatively unbiased). Any further questions feel free to contact be on list or directly. David -Original Message- From: Wilson, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:43 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED My SS120 should also be here by Friday. In fact, I'll have both scanners for the weekend so I'll try to do some good comparisons. If it's as good as everyone says and I save $200 (paid $2600 for the lesser package, paid $2800 for the LS8000), I'll be very happy. Can anyone answer the following?: - What does Binuscan and Silverfast get me over the standard software? - does the SS120 come with a IEEE1394 card? Paul Wilson > -Original Message- > From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 3:37 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED > > > My 120 is on it's way and I'm going to do some tests over the weekend. > Overall, I'm conviced that the 8000 is not ready for prime > time (although > the Nikon folks would beg to differ). Although ICE is nice, I'm more > interested in the sharpest scans with the best shadow detail > I can get. ICE > ain't going to do that for me. I still have a LS2000 so if I > have nasty 35 > slides, I can use that machine. My medium format slides and negs are > pristine so ICE is less of an issue with them... Will provide my > impressions in a few days. > > Lawrence > > > > > > > If SS120 users came to list singing its praises every day you > > would smell a > > rat and call for the exterminator :-) > > > > >
RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
> OK, but to take the mfgrs' side (which I very rarely do), how do > you "test" > a filmscanner prior to shipment? I'd say do a scan of a standard slide in an automated test setup. This is standard issue for most any product of "this nature". Cripes, for a $3k+ scanner, they can take 4 minutes to make sure it works right!
Re: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
At 07:44 PM 7/5/01 +0100, Ian Lyons wrote: >PS: I think the silence has just been broken, or maybe as a VERY satisfied >SS120 user I just needed to crow and let you Nikon users know that the grass >IS greener on the other side of the fence and judging by some of ex Nikon >8000 users on the list; the ICE has already began to melt Ian, I'm not going to respond to your post point-by-point, though it's tempting, and could be fun. Another poster asked, "Why the silence from the 8000 users." This struck me as odd, given that Lawrence and I have been not at all silent, and yet -- in the month or so that I've been back on this list -- I hadn't heard a peep from any LS-120 users. Mr. Hemingway mentions that reviews are posted somewhere on the web, but that's not the point; I was curious to hear a "warts and all" discussion of the LS-120, here on this list, from an "ordinary" user such as myself. Finally -- an objective, professional review would probably come off more believable and palatable if one abstained from expressions like "this machine wipes the floor with Brand X" or, "I'm real sorry for you Brand X users." rafe b.
