PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: filmscanners: Vuescan memory error
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:39:07 -0500
do an exhaustive test of the memory, try Norton 2002 or download a test
program
suitable for Win2k.. a complete test will take a long time so be patient.
Try
this one:
http
Definitely. I agree.
Brian
--
respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:05 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Re
And mathematicians. And as a maverick Aero engineer, I knew about them too.
Hersch
At 03:55 PM 12/06/2001 +1000, you wrote:
Julian wrote:
Maybe we should ask Ed to use complex numbers (x +iy)
to represent the focus points
I doubt that many folks on the list would have heard of
Subject: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.2.11 Available (new focus
test)
Julian wrote:
Maybe we should ask Ed to use complex numbers (x +iy)
to represent the focus points
I doubt that many folks on the list would have heard of imaginary numbers,
but I could be wrong
Brian wrote:
actually polar coordinates might be more applicable in this case.
It still comes back to the question of - relative to what? The orientation
according to the scanner, or that displayed on the screen? Having a graphical
interface with the ability to click on a point is harder to
Julian wrote:
Maybe we should ask Ed to use complex numbers (x +iy)
to represent the focus points
I doubt that many folks on the list would have heard of imaginary numbers,
but I could be wrong - there's a few electrical engineers out there I think!
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Julian wrote:
I can't see any actual advantage in putting the focus point towards a
corner rather than just near the top or bottom edge.
Because the main headache with focussing has been bowed slides which form
a kind of dome shape? A sensible average point would be halfway along a
diagonal
Jawed Ashraf wrote:
The LS40 and LS4000 (used with Nikon Scan) do. It's what
happens when the
auto-exposure kicks in (I believe) which changes the brightness of the
lamp (there's logic for why I could be wrong - I'll let somebody else
argue the point).
No, they don't. As Ed explained,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: 24 November 2001 12:00
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: VueScan clipping flat
images
Jawed Ashraf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[so much I can't
Jawed wrote:
An 8-bit A/D really would struggle.
I agree but it was as I mentioned, an artificial example. Maybe I should
have worked with what I actually have, which is a scanner with a 12 bit
A/D that the firmware drops out the 2 LSB from to return 10 bits per channel.
It doesn't matter how
Jawed wrote:
I would agree with this. The intention is quite
clearly to make the data fill the range of possible
values. For reasons analogous to the use of 16-bit
scans (really 10, 12 or 14 bits, generally): to
maximise tonal smoothness and provide resilience
under further editing.
ken wrote:
Will it upgrade the existing version on my computer? Or do I DL and
replace with same reg#?
Make a backup copy of your vuescan.ini, then install the new version. You
won't have to re-enter the registration number and you definitely don't
need a new one. Just replace the vuescan.ini
Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 5:33 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.1.26 Available
| ken wrote:
| Will it upgrade the existing version on my computer? Or do I DL and
| replace with same reg#?
|
| Make a backup copy of your
Ralf wrote:
color negative film even with ICE on. As to the colors, Vuescan seems to
*extremely* give away in the highlights part of the histogram and clip
the shadows at that, plus putting a blueish/magenta cast on everything.
I can get better use of the highlights by setting the white point to
Alan wrote:
JASC hasn't taken compression/decompression of 48-bit images
seriously because PSP can't work with them. If you do load a
48-bit image you can only save it as 24-bit.
Oh, sure. I was just pointing out that ACDSee wasn't the only program which
had problems with the Vuescan
One of the things that amazes me about Ed's work is
that, technically speaking, it is Vuescan that's
included in the Vueprint license.
Pat
--- Alan Tyson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
As a *viewer*, Ed Hamrick's *Vueprint* is pretty
well
unbeatable, and it's included in the Vuescan
In a message dated 9/4/2001 6:16:48 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
VueScan uses a predictor of 2 - 7 isn't a valid predictor. All 2 means is
to take the difference between adjacent pixel values before compressing.
I don't understand. If a predictor of 2 is invalid why would you
Ed wrote:
VueScan uses a predictor of 2 - 7 isn't a valid predictor. All 2
means is
to take the difference between adjacent pixel values before
compressing.
I don't understand. If a predictor of 2 is invalid why would you use
it?
A predictor of 7 is invalid.
A predictor of 2 is
someone else, without understanding it very well.
Regards,
Alan T
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: RE:
filmscanners: VueScan Problem
Ed wrote:
VueScan
Maris wrote:
The developer Ed Hamrick also suggests using Image for slide film.
Under what circumstances should Image be used?
If you want deep shadow detail.
Mike Duncan
In a message dated 9/2/2001 7:17:58 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know if the compression settings have changed. Only Ed can answer
that one. PSP gives an error I think about not being able to use a
predictor of 7 with 48bit depth.
VueScan uses a predictor of 2 - 7 isn't a
Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 10:42 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan Image or Slide film
| Maris wrote:
| The developer Ed Hamrick also suggests using Image for slide film.
|
| Under what circumstances should Image be used
At 10:56 AM 3/09/01 -0400, Mike wrote:
Maris wrote:
The developer Ed Hamrick also suggests using Image for slide film.
Under what circumstances should Image be used?
If you want deep shadow detail.
And I find the Slide setting also may result in burnt highlights..
mark t
Larry wrote:
The latest release of VueScan (7.1.12) is generating TIF
files that can't be read by ACDSee, my image management
program. I even installed two different releases of it to test.
I don't know if Ed has changed the compression used, but the compression
settings in Vuescan since
Hi Rob,
I'm one of those users that try it straight out of the box. If it doesn't
work then I check the settings and try again. I haven't kept up on all the
releases, but I have downloaded them religiously. This is the first time
the default settings wouldn't open in ACDSee. But then I
Larry wrote:
This is the first time the default settings wouldn't open
in ACDSee. But then I haven't used VueScan in about two months or so.
I don't know if the compression settings have changed. Only Ed can answer
that one. PSP gives an error I think about not being able to use a predictor
PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 5:14 PM
Subject: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: VueScan Problem
Larry wrote:
This is the first time the default settings wouldn't open
in ACDSee. But then I haven't used VueScan in about two months or so.
I
Maris wrote:
The developer Ed Hamrick also suggests using Image for slide film.
Under what circumstances should Image be used?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
On Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:45:08 -0700 Alan Womack
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Windows 98SE updated to the nines
an adaptec 2902E which uses the actual 2902E drivers, not the 7800
family windows wants to use.
All I have to due is turn on my scanners and start vuescan, they all
show up!
If
Chris asked:
Also, is it customary to work with the cropped files
rather than the raw files?
You can work with raw files if you want, but the main purpose of raw files
is to allow the user to go back and recrop without having to rescan. The
raw file has no embedded profiles, no adjustments
of Win98,
but I don't think that's anything to do with it.
Regards,
Alan T
- Original Message -
From: Alan Womack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Majordomo leben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:45 AM
Subject: re: filmscanners: re: filmscanners: Vuescan
Windows 98SE updated
Vuescan no longer requires me to have the device show in the device manager before
vuescan finds it, I think it might even cause windows to put it in the device manager.
On my machine, yes indeed it does cause windows to put the scanner into the device
manager WITHOUT me doing a refresh.
leben.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: re: filmscanners: re: filmscanners: Vuescan
Vuescan no longer requires me to have the device show in the device
manager before vuescan finds it, I think it might even cause windows to put
it in the device manager.
On my
Alan wrote:
Vuescan no longer requires me to have the device show in
the device manager before vuescan finds it, I think it
might even cause windows to put it in the device manager.
On my machine, yes indeed it does cause windows to put the
scanner into the device manager WITHOUT me doing a
Windows 98SE updated to the nines
an adaptec 2902E which uses the actual 2902E drivers, not the 7800 family windows
wants to use.
All I have to due is turn on my scanners and start vuescan, they all show up!
alan
Alan..
I just tried starting my Microtek 4000T w/o re-booting or
Rob
I don't remember having to do that, but perhaps I did. If it's relevant, my SCSI
card is a Tekram DC-315U.
Peter Marquis-Kyle
- Original Message -
From: Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter wrote:
Your presumption is correct. I have had Nikonscan (various versions) and
Usually use a gamma of 2.2 here in Vuescan, but I remember Mikael Risdael suggesting a
lower figure could improve results.
Alan wrote:
On slide film I'm usually around 1.8, but negs is almost always 1.0 Maybe Ed has a
gamma difference for some scanners.
Sorry I was at work at the time and
From: Colin Maddock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan Blue's
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:04:13 +1200
About VueScan and gamma settings.
Best results with normal exposed negative film , try gamma 1.4 - 1.6
and brightnes requirements?
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Colin Maddock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 6:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan Blue's
Usually use a gamma of 2.2 here in Vuescan, but I remember Mikael Risdael
Peter wrote:
Your presumption is correct. I have had Nikonscan (various versions) and
Vuescan (lots of versions) living happily together under Win 95, Win 98SE,
Win 2000.
Peter, did you have to load ASPI drivers to get the Nikon scanner working
in Win2K?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alan wrote:
Make sure you have your scanner on BEFORE you start vuescan, it does a
scsi
bus scan on startup.
Preferably switch the scanner on before you switch on the PC, or you'll
have to do a refresh in Device Manager before any software can see it.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ed wrote:
What's new in version 7.1.8
* Changing Filter|Infrared clean changes Device|Bits per pixel
Huh? Does this mean that setting Infra-red clean automatically sets the
input bits to RGBI?
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
David wrote:
Let me restate my admiration gratitude for a uniquely useful app, I
really appreciate the fruit of what must be an enormous amount of
brain strain hard graft.
Cool.
I have come to rely on it of course I am
cross when it's whipped away for such petty reasons.
If I was in
David wrote:
Yeah, me too. I had expected rather more professional
commitment - just glad I was only taken for $40.
Presumably this is the sort of invective that made Ed want to drop support
for the Mac. I can't see how it helps the cause.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, [iso-8859-1] Rob Geraghty wrote:
David wrote:
Yeah, me too. I had expected rather more professional
commitment - just glad I was only taken for $40.
Presumably this is the sort of invective that made Ed want to drop support
for the Mac. I can't see how it helps the
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.1.7 Available
| I am still a registered VuePrint user, and have always been pleased with
| Ed's support
Terry wrote:
But you know what? I don't feel taken. I got a chance to
check out the products first and decide whether they were
worth my money. I decided they were, and paid, and got
exactly what I paid for.
I'm not exactly sure how long ago I bought Vuescan, but for US$40 I've received
Andrw wrote:
I would like to start using Vuescan with my Nikon LS30. However, when I
try to scan a negative, the image comes out washed out. Scanning the
same image with NikonScan 2.5, the colors look fine. Anyone know what
I'm doing wrong?
I don't think you're doing anything wrong. Vuescan
John wrote:
it is far too easy to forget to change the output file name when
starting a new scan.
True, but if you use the + after the filename in Vuescan at least you
won't overwrite anything. :)
user interface. Human interface design clearly isn't something that lights
Ed's candle, and why
Rafe wrote:
Ayup. I still wonder why Vuescan is so revered by so many.
Earlier versions didn't even have a preview window.
Because it gets me results from my scanner I simply can't get with the OEM
driver. Sure, the interface could be improved, but *any* interface that
gets me better results
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: Friday, 20 July 2001 11:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan gripes
Rafe wrote:
Ayup. I still wonder why Vuescan is so revered by so many.
Earlier versions didn't even have
PS. I have just recently returned to this list after a long break. Does
anybody know if Ed Hamrick still partakes?
Dunno.
If not does anybody have his
email address at hand?
I think it's [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
Colin wrote:
Are you coming up with a setting for Superia, Ed?
AFAIK Vuescan's film type settings are limited by the profiles released
for PhotoCD. So if there's no PhotoCD profile for Superia, there's none
in Vuescan. The profile for Reala should be very close - they use the same
emulsion
Preston wrote:
I've managed to make three scans, but I don't know how I got
it to work with scanner.
Is your computer a PC or a Mac?
Upon opening, it just seems to sit there.
That's normal. You should see the options in the first tab, and it should
list the source device as your scanner.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 8:48 PM
Subject: re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: VueScan + flat colors
Yes, unless you are using a custom profile the native Epson driver does
indeed expect you to be in sRGB.
Alan
AFAIK this is normal. The gamuts of the colour spaces
would go with the software.
Maris
- Original Message -
From: Robert Kehl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: VueScan + flat colors
| Alan,
|
| Wait a minute! I thought the whole idea of ICC color
Mikael wrote:
1. VueScan = best results negative scanning , S-RGB and
gamma 1.4-1.8 If I use VueScan and the Adobe RGB color
space settings the picture will be flat and dull in colors.
AFAIK this is normal. The gamuts of the colour spaces are
different. But it leads me to wonder - if some
]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:39 PM
Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: VueScan + flat colors
| Mikael wrote:
| 1. VueScan = best results negative scanning , S-RGB and
| gamma 1.4-1.8 If I use VueScan and the Adobe RGB color
| space settings the picture will be flat and dull in colors
Yes, unless you are using a custom profile the native Epson driver does indeed expect
you to be in sRGB.
Alan
AFAIK this is normal. The gamuts of the colour spaces are
different. But it leads me to wonder - if some of the
problems I've had with colour matching between the screen
John wrote:
Will it only overwrite a folder on the C drive if it is named C:\Vuescan?
Will it ignore any renamed folder ?
Vuescan always installs into c:\vuescan. It has no effect on other copies.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
60 matches
Mail list logo
