Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II Bad Elements - was Supra 400 shadows
Norman Unsworth wrote: > > How do the bad elements in the CCD evidence themselves? > I'm sorry to report my second Minolta Dual Scan II is going to need replacement as well. Not only does it have a few "funky" elements in each color, (more on that later), but today I scanned some neg film (something we don't use much around here, but we had a portfolio shoot for an artist which required it) and I was shocked at the streaking the gray card image showed. At first I thought it was bad processing, since it was at the very beginning of the roll, but I then flipped the neg over and rescanned, and the defects stayed in the same locations relative to the scanner, but moved relative to the neg. This streaking is bad. A huge 300-350 pixel wide pink streak with various darker greenish ones in other locations. EKKK! So, I'm back in conversations with Minolta. It would appear, as with several other manufacturers (who will go unnamed) that Minolta might also be dealing with a slew of defects on the component level. Now, how to determine if you have some bad elements in your scanner: Obviously, if there is streaking going down the length of the frame, and it is not bad processing or scratches, then it is likely dust or dirt on the CCD, damaged or defective filters over the CCD, or a calibration problem. However, individual pixels or CCD elements can also be defective or miscalibrated. The best way I have found to check for these is to use a slide with areas of darker colors, perhaps even a near black slide will work. You want something that doesn't have a lot of lines or detail in it. Then, in something like Photoshop, zoom in to the image at about 200%, at which point you should be able to see pixels individually if you look closely. Go into channels and turn on only one, red, green or blue. I find going to the black edge (made by the slide mount) study the shorter edge closely looking for a one pixel line going lengthwise across the slide frame. These lines are often much lighter than the rest. If you see one, see if you can follow it all the way across the image to the other side. What I do is set up Photoshop to show the pixel numbers on the edge (set up in preferences) and I make note of each channel and any duff elements by pixel number. Do this process for all three channels. (R, G, B) If you do not isolate each channel, you usually cannot see them, as they get obscured by the other two channels. Once you have copied down each pixel number location, scan the slide again, but either flip it over top to bottom, OR reverse the emulsion and base surface (don't do both!). Then repeat the visual investigation. If the same pixel locations show up as lighter or whatever, regardless of the slide orientation, then the defect is the element in the scanner, not a damage on the slide. If the defects seem to be mirror imaged in position, then the defect is on your film, not the scanner. Do the same thing using negative film. In this case, the "lazy" elements will show up darker rather than lighter. Again, you need to use channels and isolate to one channel at a time to see this. Art >
filmscanners: Scan Dual II Bad Elements - was Supra 400 shadows
How do the bad elements in the CCD evidence themselves? Norm Unsworth, Owner CS Golf (formerly Clark Systems Custom Golf) Outstanding Quality and Value in Custom Golf Equipment 609 641 5712 Please send email to me at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit our Web Site at http://members.home.net/csgolf -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 6:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Supra 400 shadows I recently had my Minolta Dual II replaced by Minolta, after only owning it a week. The second one has lower "noise" in the shadow areas than the first... More important, however, is my first one had many "bad" elements in the CCD. I was unable to determine if this is a matter of physically bad CCD elements or dirt in the unit, or defective filters over the CCD, or bad calibration or what. The first unit had between 3 and 5 bad sensors per color... Art
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II problem
on 3/24/01 5:24 PM, Berry Ives at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Guess this is a question for Minolta... > > My scanner just started making a thin band across the long dimension of the > image, viewable on the monitor and comes out on the print as well. The band > has a cyan cast, and it is about 1/32" wide (1 mm) on a full format > 7x10.5"(18x26cm) print. I appears consistently about 1" (2.5cm) from the > edge of the print. > > Seems to me likely to be a CCD problem. I'll probably call Minolta on > Monday, but does anybody have any ideas about this? > > -Berry > I wanted to share that I tried the fixes suggested by two on this list, who thought it more likely that some dust or other detritis had lodged itself on the CCD. The suggestions included turning the scanner on one side; tapping it; blasting some dust off into it, taking care not to shoot propellent into it; and whatever combinations of the above. Didn't help. Called Minolta, and they had me return it. That was last Friday, so now is the test of the warranty. Sent it express mail, so they should have received it by Monday. We shall see. -Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II problem
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 17:24:29 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > My scanner just started making a thin band across the long dimension of the > image, viewable on the monitor and comes out on the print as well. The band > has a cyan cast, and it is about 1/32" wide (1 mm) on a full format > 7x10.5"(18x26cm) print. I appears consistently about 1" (2.5cm) from the > edge of the print. Usually a bit of debris sat on the CCD surface, or in the optics - it creates a tramline as the machine scans. Air duster may shift it, but be careful not to squirt propellant into the scanner. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II problem
This could either be a failed CCD sensor, or, more likely some dust that has fallen over the CCD. Try placing the scanner on its side and gently tap it on all sides. Then try scanning something with it still on it's side. That might fix it. If not, some careful use of compressed air in the right location might do it, but you might need some instruction from Minolta on how to direct it. Obviously, if it is under warranty, and the CCD has failed they should replace your unit. Art Berry Ives wrote: > Guess this is a question for Minolta... > > My scanner just started making a thin band across the long dimension of the > image, viewable on the monitor and comes out on the print as well. The band > has a cyan cast, and it is about 1/32" wide (1 mm) on a full format > 7x10.5"(18x26cm) print. I appears consistently about 1" (2.5cm) from the > edge of the print. > > Seems to me likely to be a CCD problem. I'll probably call Minolta on > Monday, but does anybody have any ideas about this? > > -Berry
filmscanners: Scan Dual II problem
Guess this is a question for Minolta... My scanner just started making a thin band across the long dimension of the image, viewable on the monitor and comes out on the print as well. The band has a cyan cast, and it is about 1/32" wide (1 mm) on a full format 7x10.5"(18x26cm) print. I appears consistently about 1" (2.5cm) from the edge of the print. Seems to me likely to be a CCD problem. I'll probably call Minolta on Monday, but does anybody have any ideas about this? -Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
In a message dated 3/10/2001 11:04:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I didn't see any spec that differed from my Scan Dual II, except that the case is white rather than the usual putty. The price is as low as $444 + $7 shipping. See this url: http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-2295735-417-3709545.html?tag=st.co.2295 735-404-3709545.txt-specs.2295735-417-3709545 -Berry This is where I found it, on Cnet. Minolta claims no association with the term "white", must be just a way for distributors or search engines to differentiate between SDII with PS LE and GF 2.0 and the SDII with just PS LE. Ed
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
In a message dated 3/10/2001 6:40:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does it mention if Photoshop 5.0LE also comes with the white, as well as the GF software? Art Says it comes with both for both "versions". I have since e-mailed Minolta and was very surprised by the quick response in light of hearing about slow to no support from Minolta. They did confirm that "white" was with the Genuine Fractals 2.0 software. They did say that there was no such thing as a "white" version, just confirmed the part number that was $50 more had GF. Now my second question, is GF worth it? Thanks Ed
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
on 3/10/01 2:08 AM, Arthur Entlich at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Now for something completely different: >> what is the difference between the Scan Dual II and Scan Dual II White? Both >> come up after a search of cdnet and znet, with the White version being about >> $50 more. It may be the Genuine Fractals software, but I'm not sure. If GF >> is the extra amount, is it a worthy investment? Or just another bell and >> whistle I don't need? >> Thanks >> Ed > > I have no idea... Maybe they are cashing in on the Apple craze, and > soon there will be watermelon and cranberry ones to? Maybe enough > people didn't like the blue parts? Maybe the white ones are made in > Japan and the Blue elsewhere? > > Does it mention if Photoshop 5.0LE also comes with the white, as well as > the GF software? > > Art > I didn't see any spec that differed from my Scan Dual II, except that the case is white rather than the usual putty. The price is as low as $444 + $7 shipping. See this url: http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-2295735-417-3709545.html?tag=st.co.2295 735-404-3709545.txt-specs.2295735-417-3709545 -Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Now for something completely different: > what is the difference between the Scan Dual II and Scan Dual II White? Both > come up after a search of cdnet and znet, with the White version being about > $50 more. It may be the Genuine Fractals software, but I'm not sure. If GF > is the extra amount, is it a worthy investment? Or just another bell and > whistle I don't need? > Thanks > Ed I have no idea... Maybe they are cashing in on the Apple craze, and soon there will be watermelon and cranberry ones to? Maybe enough people didn't like the blue parts? Maybe the white ones are made in Japan and the Blue elsewhere? Does it mention if Photoshop 5.0LE also comes with the white, as well as the GF software? Art
filmscanners: Scan Dual II
Now for something completely different: what is the difference between the Scan Dual II and Scan Dual II White? Both come up after a search of cdnet and znet, with the White version being about $50 more. It may be the Genuine Fractals software, but I'm not sure. If GF is the extra amount, is it a worthy investment? Or just another bell and whistle I don't need? Thanks Ed
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:15:12 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Was it clear that I was making a color image? I tried what you suggested, > although it made no sense to me, and I ended up with a total gray scale > image with no color, as one might expect. Am I not understanding your > suggestion? Sorry, I thought you were trying to get an RGB scan of a monochrome image. > A color lab print exhibited a pure neutral gray in the background area. The > problem is not the printer since I am seeing the objectionable color on the > monitor as well. These sorts of deviation from neutrality (and different colour casts at different densities) are very common. Vuescan manages to reduce them on most films far more successfully than any other s/w IMO. However unfortunately I don't think Ed has managed to reverse-engineer USB as found in the Dual Scan 2. The only way to cope (without profiling software) is to edit the R,G &B gamma curves manually, and individually to give a more neutral result. This will drive you half crazy, but once you've done it you can save the curves (in PS anyhow), and they'll be re-useable for other images on the same film. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
on 2/25/01 3:21 AM, Arthur Entlich at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Berry Ives wrote: > >> on 2/24/01 9:00 AM, Tony Sleep at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> >>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:08:18 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >>> wrote: >>> >>> 4. I had a lot of trouble trying to get neutral gray in the background out-of-focus area of one image (Fuji S400). I ended up accepting some magenta surrounding the darker grays that came out okay, and then around the magentas I had subtle halos of cyan. ... > 1) scan a gray scale or some gray patches in RGB mode, and see if they > shift to tinted tones. You have to scan in color mode, or the driver > will simply return only gray scale data to your monitor and you won't be > able to tell anything. > > 2) Take a black and white neg and mount it in a slide mount and scan as > a color slide, or if your scanner software allows, scan a frame from a > black and white neg strip and scan it as a color slide strip. > > Art > Thanks. I'll try to do the tests soon. -Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
Berry Ives wrote: > on 2/24/01 9:00 AM, Tony Sleep at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:08:18 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >> wrote: >> >> >>> 4. I had a lot of trouble trying to get neutral gray in the background >>> out-of-focus area of one image (Fuji S400). I ended up accepting some >>> magenta surrounding the darker grays that came out okay, and then around the >>> magentas I had subtle halos of cyan. ... I suspect you might be seeing a problem which is typical on my S-20 scanner, and is basically out of alignment filters or motor slippage or something, that causes color fringing. It may be more obvious in out of focus areas because there isn't much detail there to hide it, or it could be posterization of certain gray levels, or simply a poor gray scale that shifts one way on some grays and the other on others. To check to see what's causing this: 1) scan a gray scale or some gray patches in RGB mode, and see if they shift to tinted tones. You have to scan in color mode, or the driver will simply return only gray scale data to your monitor and you won't be able to tell anything. 2) Take a black and white neg and mount it in a slide mount and scan as a color slide, or if your scanner software allows, scan a frame from a black and white neg strip and scan it as a color slide strip. Look closely to see if you see color (beyond random noise). If you are seeing color fringing or bars running through the image, the filters are likely out of alignment, the stepper motor or transport slipping or the optics have color defects. If you see different colors in different gray values, you are probably seeing bad programing in the driver, or color imbalance in the CCD sensitivities or filtering, of focal differences caused by the filters within the scanner. >> >> Convert to greyscale in PS. Then convert back to RGB. Brutal, but neutrality >> assured - unless it's a printer problem :) >> Yes, this confused me as well. Art
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
on 2/24/01 9:00 AM, Tony Sleep at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:08:18 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > wrote: > >> 4. I had a lot of trouble trying to get neutral gray in the background >> out-of-focus area of one image (Fuji S400). I ended up accepting some >> magenta surrounding the darker grays that came out okay, and then around the >> magentas I had subtle halos of cyan. ... > > Convert to greyscale in PS. Then convert back to RGB. Brutal, but neutrality > assured - unless it's a printer problem :) > > Regards > > Tony Sleep > http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & > comparisons > Was it clear that I was making a color image? I tried what you suggested, although it made no sense to me, and I ended up with a total gray scale image with no color, as one might expect. Am I not understanding your suggestion? A color lab print exhibited a pure neutral gray in the background area. The problem is not the printer since I am seeing the objectionable color on the monitor as well. Thanks, Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 19:08:18 -0700 Berry Ives ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > 4. I had a lot of trouble trying to get neutral gray in the background > out-of-focus area of one image (Fuji S400). I ended up accepting some > magenta surrounding the darker grays that came out okay, and then around the > magentas I had subtle halos of cyan. My wife and others said screw it, it > looks beautiful. So it worked with that image well enough, but I do think > that may be a problem when I really do need to maintain neutral gray, and am > not just being anal about it. Convert to greyscale in PS. Then convert back to RGB. Brutal, but neutrality assured - unless it's a printer problem :) Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
filmscanners: Scan Dual II on Mac platform
on 2/22/01 4:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I did fancy the > Minolta Scandual2 but here in the UK it's a full 33% more expensive then it > is in the US and that I object to.. > > Graham > Report on my initial experience with my new Scan Dual II: 1. The software is pretty easy to use, and it has several of the basic Photoshop-like adjustments that are quite straitforward. 2. The sizing-cropping procedure is not very intuitive, and this makes me wish that I could try Vuescan. But I can work with it okay, and it is getting easier. 3. I have been able to make very nice prints on Generations sample paper pack. (I have not printed larger than 8 x 10.) The water color paper is beautiful to print on. I am still using up the cartridges that came with the refurb Epson 1160, before I set up the CIS (continuous inking system, for the recent arrivals here). The refurb has worked perfectly. 4. I had a lot of trouble trying to get neutral gray in the background out-of-focus area of one image (Fuji S400). I ended up accepting some magenta surrounding the darker grays that came out okay, and then around the magentas I had subtle halos of cyan. My wife and others said screw it, it looks beautiful. So it worked with that image well enough, but I do think that may be a problem when I really do need to maintain neutral gray, and am not just being anal about it. 5. It is really fun to make prints like this, overall. I last did B&W and color darkroom printing in the early 80s at UNM (oh my god...). Now, no chemicals, darkness, washing prints, etc. And my wife cannot complain about the smell and mess of a darkroom. 6. I think I want to have a second monitor now so I can have the working image on a separate screen. 7. Thanks to all those who offerred advice and info of various kinds on this list. 8. Now, back to art! --Berry
Re: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
Title: RE: filmscanners: Scan Dual II Hi Daryl, I would appreciate it very much if you had a few sample slide scans, type of shot could be landscapes, people, street scenes and of course in color. I have slides dating back to 1960 which I want to scan to CD. A comparison scan using the default settings in both the Minolta software and VueScan would be a bonus. I have the SCSI model of the HP PhotoSmart which I use with VueScan. I like ViewScan however I have nothing but bad luck with the PhotoSmart. It has been replaced three times. Dale - Original Message - From: Daryl G. Jurbala To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:21 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Scan Dual II I have been very happy with mine, but I use VueScan. I scan mostly slides (Kodachrome and Provia). It has some troubles with certain Velvia images, as most CCD scanners seem to. I wish I had a Q-60 to scan on it, but I may be able to come up with some other things to scan for you if you give me an idea of what you might like to see (trannies or negs, type of shot, color or bw etc.). Again, overall I'm very pleased. It outperforms all other in it's price range in my opinion and for my purposes. And VueScan is the greatest piece of software ever. ;) Daryl > -Original Message- > From: Dale & Gail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: filmscanners: Scan Dual II > > > Hi, > > Anyone on this list have the Minolta scan Dual II? Does it > do a good job > with slides. What is the software like? Have you sample > unaltered scans that > are available for view? > > Thank you > Dale > >
RE: filmscanners: Scan Dual II
Title: RE: filmscanners: Scan Dual II I have been very happy with mine, but I use VueScan. I scan mostly slides (Kodachrome and Provia). It has some troubles with certain Velvia images, as most CCD scanners seem to. I wish I had a Q-60 to scan on it, but I may be able to come up with some other things to scan for you if you give me an idea of what you might like to see (trannies or negs, type of shot, color or bw etc.). Again, overall I'm very pleased. It outperforms all other in it's price range in my opinion and for my purposes. And VueScan is the greatest piece of software ever. ;) Daryl > -Original Message- > From: Dale & Gail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: filmscanners: Scan Dual II > > > Hi, > > Anyone on this list have the Minolta scan Dual II? Does it > do a good job > with slides. What is the software like? Have you sample > unaltered scans that > are available for view? > > Thank you > Dale > >
filmscanners: Scan Dual II
Hi, Anyone on this list have the Minolta scan Dual II? Does it do a good job with slides. What is the software like? Have you sample unaltered scans that are available for view? Thank you Dale
RE: filmscanners: Scan Dual II using Minolta s/w: 16-bit or 16-bit linear for data setting?
Felix Sieder wrote: > Am I better choosing 16-bit or 16-bit linear for the > data settings under preferences. Is there any difference > between these two if I don't alter the colour or curve > correction settings in the software? I can only speculate (I have an Elite) but with the Elite the 16-bit output is adjusted to the working space chosen in the driver software when the driver processes the file. With slides, the 16 bit linear file remains in the scanners own colour space, with a gamma of 1. The Elite shipped with an ICM profile so these linear files can be converted in Photoshop into the working space. I assume the Dual II ships with an appropriate profile as well. (With negs, the driver does do some adjustments to the 16 bit linear file so its not as raw as when using the slide setting.) I have scanned in the same slide using 16 bit and 16 bit linear + profile to profile conversion. The results are, not surprisingly, very similar. However, the 16 bit seems to keep the shadow details slightly less compressed and the colour balance is fractionally truer. I can only speculate that the profile used to convert the 16 bit linear file perhaps is only best when the scanner is "locked down" in a particular state and that, when exposure is adjusted, the profile doesn't work quite as well. It's also possible that in 16 bit output mode the driver perhaps makes better use of the calibration data gathered during startup. However, the up side of using the 16 bit linear mode is that the scans are a lot quicker, even allowing for the extra step of the profile to profile conversion in Photoshop. I'd be interested to know whether the results and scanning speed from the Dual II follow the same sort of pattern. Al Bond
filmscanners: Scan Dual II using Minolta s/w: 16-bit or 16-bit linear for data setting?
Sorry for all the questions concerning the Scan Dual II. My intentions are to scan slides with the software and do all colour, curve, ... corrections within Photoshop 6.0. When scanning using the Minolta software I never touch the image correction tools. I usually just crop and focus adjustments before the final scan. Am I better choosing 16-bit or 16-bit linear for the data settings under preferences. Is there any difference between these two if I don't alter the colour or curve correction settings in the software? Many thanks, Felix Sieder _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
