In a message dated 12/19/2001 6:05:00 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just started scanning some Kodachromes with the SS120, with
disastrous results. I had previously scanned them on an Epson 1640 (which
I was using before the SS120) with default settings and got satisfactory,
At 04:06 PM 12/19/01, Ian Lyons wrote:
With Silverfast, the scans are so far off color-wise that it is
virtually impossible to correct, while with Insight, I was able to get
reasonably close with PS modifications.
Hmm, if SilverFast colour management is correctly configured you should
The clue might be that the one you are having trouble with has a huge amount of color shift. I don't know why that would keep any scanner software package from scanning the transparency so that it looked the same in Photoshop as the original.
I assume you know how to set up Silverfast correctly.
Jeff--
I pulled out a couple of Tri-X scans at 1000 dpi, 2000 dpi and 4000
dpi I made on my Nikon LS4000ED a couple of months ago as a test, and
they don't look any better than the sample you posted. These are
30-year old negs which I think were from my Rodinal period (one of
them could
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Spirer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:58 AM
Subject: filmscanners: SS120 Grain Problem
I'm having problems with grain with the Polaroid SS120. This can be seen
in the sample at:
Jim,
If you have SilverFast (might be possible in Photoshop but I've never tried)
it is possible to reduce the grainy look (aliasing) by using the Descreen
filter. I posted a short tutorial on this a week or so back to my web site.
http://www.rgbnet.co.uk/ilyons/sf5-negafix/grain_reduction.htm
I'm having problems with grain with the Polaroid SS120. This can be
seen in the sample at:
http://www.spirer.com/images/grain.jpg
This is from a 6x7 neg scanned at 2880, unsharpened. I get far less
grain with my Epson 1640 and am wondering what is going on. The
original neg is Tri-X in
Most solvents, and things like markers tend to melt the plastic leaving
a relatively glossy result.
I would suggest people needing to create a non-reflective surface on
most plastics should use some 3M wet or dry silicone carbide paper.
This stuff is gray black in color usually, is sold in
Rob Geraghty wrote:
Wouldn't you need something matte - like a black matte paint for
plastic
models? Magic marker ink might not take enough shine out of the
plastic.
Yeah, maybe. But a few years ago when I had this problem with 4x5
film
(I had a reflection about 1/4 into the film on the
Barbara wrote:
Well, I tried the magic marker along the edges, both on the
edges of the carrier, and on the carrier cover, also. Sorry
to say, it didn't work.
Wouldn't you need something matte - like a black matte paint for plastic
models? Magic marker ink might not take enough shine out of
I was thinking of trying a Qtip dipped in acetone and run it along the two
vertical edges.
David
-Original Message-
From: Barbara White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 12:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:filmscanners: SS120: Reflections on
From everything I've read about the Polaroid SprintScan 120, and from my own experience, it is one of the best medium format film scanners the average photographer can currently afford. It would be a shame for you to pass up such a fine scanner based solely on this argument. I've never noticed any
in Germany and lead to a much longer warranty from
01/01/2002 on.
greetings Bernhard
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 9:51
AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120:
Reflections on edge of neg
From everyt
: Bernie Ess
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 1:16
PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
filmscanners: SS120: Reflections on edge of neg
Roger, thank you for your
reflexions,
you say that the Pola 120 "it is one of the best
medium format film sca
How about shadow detail and contrast on these?
Greetings Bernhard
- Original Message -
From:
Wilson, Paul
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 8:31
PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS120:
Reflections on edge of neg
Stylistically, I'd call t
Magic markers really don't provide a non-reflective surface on a smooth
surface...so I don't believe that would really solve the problem.
Well, I tried the magic marker along the edges, both on the edges of the
carrier, and on the carrier cover, also. Sorry to say, it didn't work.
So, I
- Original Message -
From: Barbara White [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
() and cured it by running a black magic
marker along it. I'm going to try this with the film holder for the 6x6
negs - will report back if it works.
Yes this is interesting: I wait for your
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120: reflexions at the borders of the neg
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Spirer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners
At 07:47 AM 11/20/01, Bernie Ess wrote:
Someone who has the SS120 told me that one cannot really use the whole
negative because near the border or the film holders there were reflexions.
I don´t know which borders exatly he means but he speaks of 2-3mm which is
IMO quite a lot and would make of a
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Spirer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120: reflexions at the borders of the neg
It's not quite what you state, it is only along the
film carrier edges, so your 57x57 neg would
Barbara
I too had a good deal of trouble opening Silverfast. I'm using Photoshop 6
on a Mac G4. But, with much effort I did get it to work. Don't ask how
because I do not remember. Then, after comparing scans made and color
corrected with much effort in Silverfast to those made with Vuescan
Try out Vuescan and see if you like it - trial download is free.
The essential differences are that Vuescan is designed to (and does) capture *all*
information from the slide or film, and then you adjust color, tone and contrast in
Photoshop.
Silverfast is designed to do color, tone and
Barbara,
you'll need to provide a lot more info than it don't work! Lots of folk on
this forum know lots about many things, but none have yet claimed any
expertise at mind reading.
Ian
Barbara,
Might need a little bit of info on the definition of does not work.
Platform, OS version etc. Also who have you been talking to at Lasersoft?
I will say that as Silverfast is a Photoshop Plugin, Photoshop can sometimes
cause the problem. Rather than chase it is sometimes easier to
I couldn't agree more.
In fact as far as I can see the Jessops business plan is to buy up all
their competitors so that all the choice you have is them and they can
charge what they like.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Lyons) wrote:
Paul,
Jessops mainly serve the amateur market and you will
This web page is a listing of the Polaroid scanner dealers in the UK
David
http://home.polaroid.co.uk/sprintscan/dealers.htm
-Original Message-
From: peter.phipp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 5:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
ah. So they're selling at what appears to be cost then. Possibly without
the Euro software bundle ?
I think I will go back to Robert White:
(http://www.robertwhite.co.uk)
They tell it like it is and have a global reputation for excellent service
and impartial advice.
-Original
sorry about that, it wasn't what they told me earlier this week,
and remains the published price in their price list,
regardless, its still about £1000 less than Jessops, which is a *lot* of
moolah
pg
Jessops have a price match policy. I bought a 1gb Microdrive from them for
£260 even though they had it listed for £399.00 !
Kevin
Paul,
Jessops mainly serve the amateur market and you will find that they are slow
to pass on discounts of the magnitude we are seeing until their direct
competitors do likewise.
If you can get the SS120 from Argon for £1499 take it and forget Jessops!!!
They are NOT the dealer they once
Paul,
I don't have the foggiest but will try to get to the bottom of it with the
help of my UK colleagues. I will get back to you.
Thank you
David
-Original Message-
From: PAUL GRAHAM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 12:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
well I have it form a very reputable source that Polaroid's price to
retailers in the UK is £1722.
This indicates that anybody selling it on at 1499 is either (a) insane, or
(b) getting their supplies somewhere else.
-Original Message-
From: PAUL GRAHAM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
on the SS120.
David
-Original Message-
From: David Mantripp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 7:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: filmscanners: SS120
well I have it form a very reputable source that Polaroid's price to
retailers in the UK
well I have it form a very reputable source that Polaroid's price to
retailers in the UK is £1722.
This indicates that anybody selling it on at 1499 is either (a) insane, or
(b) getting their supplies somewhere else.
Ummm,
no its not a secondhand unit, or ex-demo, nor are they insane.
just a
Austin Franklin wrote:
Yes, this is in fact exactly what I am speaking of. Minolta does this
on a small scale with their Multi scanner line.
That's not zooming, it's changing the magnification. That is entirely
different.
I'm not sure I see a difference in this case. If the
A zoom (or variable focal length) lens narrows the field of view as the focal
length is increased - that's magnification.
Jim
Arthur Entlich wrote:
Austin Franklin wrote:
Yes, this is in fact exactly what I am speaking of. Minolta does this
on a small scale with their Multi
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 9:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS120 Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
To quote: Imaging Optics: Scanner Nikkor ED lens (14 elements in
6 groups including 6 ED glass elements) No mention of zoom here
Jeffrey Goggin wrote:
Other than the Minolta Multi, the other MF scanners seem to work
similarly to a flatbed, in the sense that regardless of the size of the
original, the resolution of the CCD remains fixed (in this case at 4000
dpi.)
This may be true of the current Nikon and
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Arthur Entlich wrote:
I'm looking over my Nikon lens chart here, which is admittedly a bit
outdated, but other than some very wide lenses (13mm, 15mm, 18mm, 20mm
and a fast 24mm) one 200mm, one 300 mm ED and one 105mm micro, no fixed
focus Nikon lens has more than
Lynn Allen wrote:
Art wrote:
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same optics for all the film
This may be true of the current Nikon and Polaroid models but
many of the
other film scanners that handle MF film (Leafscan, etc.) use
the different
lenses for different formats ... right?
The Leaf uses one lense, a 75mm Rodenstock flat field copy lense.
/20th that size,
and wait for technology to improve on my brilliant Rube Goldberg design.
;-)
Obviously, I'm not an engineear--I can barely spell it. ;-)
Best regards--LRA
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001 09:22:34 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But, at least to me, it's hard to imagine needing (or for that matter
wanting) a FOURTEEN element lense that isn't a zoom! It may not be a
zoom, but it's got to do something else...
Maybe have the flattest
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same optics for all the film formats.
I seem to be missing
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
Art wrote:
Many moons ago, I was working on the concept of a system to allow a 35mm
frame to be projected on a flatbed scanner surface. This could, in
theory, allow for even a 600 dpi scanner to record a 35mm frame at about
4800 x 7200 ppi,
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
Art wrote:
Many moons ago, I was working on the concept of a system to allow
a 35mm
frame to be projected on a flatbed scanner surface. This could,
in
theory, allow for even a 600 dpi scanner to record a 35mm frame
at about
4800 x 7200 ppi,
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:16:01 Jeffrey Goggin ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Perhaps someone can clarify something for me ... how do the new Nikon
and
Polaroid scanners achieve their claimed 4000dpi resolution for multiple
formats?
They must be using a 4000ppi CCD which is at least 2.25
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same optics for all the film formats.
That eliminates the need for
At 03:14 AM 7/12/01 -0700, Art wrote:
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same optics for all the film
To quote: Imaging Optics: Scanner Nikkor ED lens (14 elements in
6 groups including 6 ED glass elements) No mention of zoom here.
But, at least to me, it's hard to imagine needing (or for that matter
wanting) a FOURTEEN element lense that isn't a zoom! It may not be a
zoom, but it's got to
On 12-07-2001, rafeb wrote:
At 03:14 AM 7/12/01 -0700, Art wrote:
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same
Other than the Minolta Multi, the other MF scanners seem to work
similarly to a flatbed, in the sense that regardless of the size of the
original, the resolution of the CCD remains fixed (in this case at 4000
dpi.)
This may be true of the current Nikon and Polaroid models but many of the
other
Title: RE: filmscanners: SS120 Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
A Canon 100/2.8 macro lens has 12 elements so I don't think 14 elements for a scanner lens is
that hard to believe.
Paul Wilson
-Original Message-
From: Austin Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday
. :-)
Best regards--LRA
From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120 Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 03:14:33 -0700
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners
believing this is Razle-dazle 'em. It don't seem wise, but
what do I know? Would wiser heads care to comment?
Best regards--LRA
From: Hans Rijnbout [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS120 Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
Date: Thu, 12 Jul
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote:
Art wrote:
It seems to me for some reason that most of the newer medium format
scanners manufacturers decided to forego the zoom lens approach
that Minolta has and continues to use with their Multi models,
and just basically use the same optics for
At 20:30 10-07-01 -0400, rafeb wrote:
Your complaint regarding NikonScan 3.1 being buggy
is surprising to me. I had some initial problems
getting NS installed, but it has not been remotely
buggy since then. The installation issues turned
out to be due to device conflicts.
Which leads me to
At 06:51 AM 7/11/01 -0400, Cary Enoch Reinstein wrote:
[Rafe B:]
Your complaint regarding NikonScan 3.1 being buggy
is surprising to me. I had some initial problems
getting NS installed, but it has not been remotely
buggy since then. The installation issues turned
out to be due to device
At 11:16 PM 7/10/01, Jeff Goggin wrote:
Perhaps someone can clarify something for me ... how do the new Nikon and
Polaroid scanners achieve their claimed 4000dpi resolution for multiple
formats? Unlike most film scanners that accomodate multiple formats, the
claimed resolution of these scanners
Your complaint regarding NikonScan 3.1 being buggy
is surprising to me. I had some initial problems
getting NS installed, but it has not been remotely
buggy since then. The installation issues turned
out to be due to device conflicts.
Which leads me to suspect that a good number of
The Polaroid 35 mm slide holder, while basic, works perfectly well in my
experience.
-Original Message-
From: Wilson, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 1:57 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: filmscanners: SS120 first impressions and a few questions.
I
Paul, thanks for (yet another) LS-120 review.
A couple of comments if I may.
Your complaint regarding NikonScan 3.1 being buggy
is surprising to me. I had some initial problems
getting NS installed, but it has not been remotely
buggy since then. The installation issues turned
out to be
At 05:37 PM 7/10/01 -0700, Slavitt, Howard wrote:
I too wonder whether the Polaroid may have problems with dust getting insde.
I strongly suspect that with either the SS120 or Nikon 8000ED scan quality
may decrease over time as more dust gets inside the machine. You should
definitely put a dust
Title: RE: filmscanners: SS120 first impressions and a few questions.
Hi Rafe,
It was definitely buggy on my system. Actually, when it worked it worked well. When was the problem. It would often crash for no apparent reason. Also, it often had problems recognizing that there was a film
Given the number of queries I've received off-list here is a link to 6 pages
of images (no doctoring) that should answer the bulk of the questions. The
pages will take a few minutes to download if using a modem.
http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.lyons/ss120/ss120_a.htm
Ian Lyons
Can anyone tell me if the Polaroid SS120 does multipass scanning to
reduce noise in the shadows?
Thanks
Peter Lindman
David,
The review mentions PolaColor 5.0. Is this software
available for download on any of Polaroid's webpages?
I still can find PC4.5 only.
Robert
--- Hemingway, David J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A couple of Sprintscan 120 reviews have been posted
on the Polaroid UK web
site.
I am trying to figure out why it isn't up yet. Will let the list know as
soon as I find out.
David
-Original Message-
From: Robert Meier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: filmscanners: SS120 reviews
David
68 matches
Mail list logo
