>> Don't do it.
I'd say quite the opposite. :-D
>> I had an SS4000 and it with an LS-400 (4000ED). The
>> Polaroid is a better scanner. Better shadow detail.
>> Crisper -- no depth of field problem.
This all depends on the negative flatness - if they're flat the DoF
simply isn't an issue.
>> That's how I normally scan. The scanner is on an
>> underpowered machine and saves the scans across the network
>> to my editing machine. Slower to scan, but editing while
>> scanning is much, much faster. I think 128MB would be too
>> low, even to scan, but 256Mb would be OK. For that m
>> I second the idea of scanning using a separate machine.
>> Even though W2K task manager shows that there is about 50%
>> CPU load scanning using Vuescan (was 100% on a P200), trying
>> to run anything alongside Vuescan is virtually impossible
>> for me.
I find that turning down the appl
Hi Jim,
I think your circumstances demand dICE, no question about it!
In fact, dICE was invented with you in mind ;-)
I think you will admit that your situation is more an exception than
rule, but I could not come up with a valid argument against the logic of
your considerations. Get a model w
> If a pc is used just for scanning (using some bundled software, eg.
> silverscan) would it scan as well if it has limited memory eg. 128 or 256Mb?
>
> Final image manipulation would be done on a different box with as much memory
> as necessary.
Depends on the software. Under Linux and with SAN
Allesandro Pardi wrote:
>By the way, how would you flatbedders rate 6x6 or 6x7 scanned this way
>versus 35mm fed to 4000dpi filmscanners? I moved to 6x7 to get better
>prints, but haven't decided on a scanner yet, so I'd like to know whether
>this new breed of flatbeds is enough to give justice t
Arthur Entlich wrote:
>However, I will again state that due to the lighting type, normal
>amounts of dust, dirt and light scratches are not a real problem with
>the SS4000/+ scanners, and if you have a PC, the new filter/software
>makes even more extreme situations easier to deal with.
>
>Art
>
A
Not true. The Polaroid is a fine scanner but the LS-4000 ED has better
shadow detail. There are several tests on the web that will show you that.
Shadow detail is important to me and it was one of the reasons for me to
pick the LS-4000 ED. I have been using the Nikon intensively for a few
months n
>Larry,
>
>Was there anything wrong looking between the holder that didn't work
and the new one that did?
Hi: A visual inspection of the "old" 120 holder showed nothing
broken or scratched. When I called the Canadian Service manager he
told me they had a problem with some of the 120 holders, I s
At 06:58 27/05/2002 -0400, Tom Scales wrote:
>I think 128MB would be too
>low, even to scan, but 256Mb would be OK. For that matter, memory is so
>cheap, I'd add more even to that machine.
I am scanning from a Nikon LS30, saving 64bit RGBI files using
Vuescan. This gives compressed TIFF files o
Hi Vasilis,
You can always try reinstalling the software and the firmware in the
scanner. The film carrier is heavier, and if something is not grasping
the carrier tightly enough, it may slip more easily than the slide carrier.
If there is any slippage, the calibration will be delayed because t
I'm unfamiliar with this problem, but I suspect your neg film carrier
has developed a problem. Make sure the track on the bottom is clean or
grim and grease. If you have not been using the little brush (which
either should have come with the scanner new or should have been offered
to you ages ag
That's how I normally scan. The scanner is on an underpowered machine and
saves the scans across the network to my editing machine. Slower to scan,
but editing while scanning is much, much faster. I think 128MB would be too
low, even to scan, but 256Mb would be OK. For that matter, memory is so
> I believe that the problem with
> scanning negs is not the hardware...but the software. As
> soon as I dumped MagicScan and switched to VueScan, I was and still am as
> happy as a clam scanning 6x6 negs!
>
> Joyfully, -david soderman- <><
>
David,
very true, the evidence is that prosumer scan
Hi,
If a pc is used just for scanning (using some bundled software, eg.
silverscan) would it scan as well if it has limited memory eg. 128 or 256Mb?
Final image manipulation would be done on a different box with as much memory
as necessary.
TIA
Charles
=
15 matches
Mail list logo
