Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
I saved this filmscanners post from July 2000 which I think might be useful to current listmembers. Original Message - On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:17:34 +1200, Stu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vlad - Mitsui Gold on Gold are often touted as the best CD-Rs - in my experience TDK are good in that I have never had one with a defect out of a spindle of 150 CD-Rs. below is an email from earlier in the year which is very on the topic: Stu To:Filmscannerslist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:OT FYI on CD-R's From:glenn mclaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]Add to Contacts Date:Fri, May 26 2000 2:54:37 PM -0400 I came across this info and thought everyone might like to have for their FYI files. Never can seem to find it when you need it most and have no time to search. Full thread may be found at: http://www.macintouch.com/cdrfailure.html Regards, Glenn McLaughlin in summry Erich Hammer wrote, "The warning: Although you may think that archiving your data on CD-Rs is safe (optical storage supposedly lasts years longer than magnetic), apparently it ain't. " Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 15:13:01 -0800 From: RJ Polito Subject: CD-R failures Ric, A note about Erich Hammer's comment about "cheap CDRs". Unfortunately, this happens to a ton of people who buy cheap CD-Rs. As a distributor of Mitsui Gold on Gold (since 1994) and a technical consultant for CD-R media for the pro audio industry there are way too many factors that determine the quality and longevity of CDR media. Here are some visual tests to eliminate the really cheap ones: 1. Hold the disc up towards a light source and check for transparency. If you can see thru it like a piece of wax paper, stay clear of this stuff. 2. If you can see little pin-like holes in the disc, it's a disaster waiting in the wings. 3. Avoid any hybrid dye products. There are only 3 types of CD-Rs: Azu (blue) dye (Verbatim patent), Cyanine (green) dye (Taiyo Yuden patent), and Phthalocyanine (gold stabilized clear) dye (Mitsui patent). All other CD-Rs, no matter whose name is on it, are either OEMs or hybrids of these three dyes. 4. And, avoid any media with lots of design "painted" on the surface of the CD-R. This has been proven to interfere with the read and/or write session. CD-Rs with surfaces covered entirely with "paint" are suspect. This technique is usually used to conceal the very, very thin dye layer under the surface. Other factors: 1. All dyes EXCEPT Phthalocyanine are unstable (read, moving). Although your recorder/app may verify the write session, the unstable dye may have created a less-than-accurate cut causing unreadable playback. Nothing you can do about this once the CD-R is burned. (To get the idea, place a sheet of paper on a table, and while someone shakes the paper try to draw a straight line. Here is your pit and land geometry from unstable dye CD-Rs.) Use a stable dye based CD-R and this won't happen. 2. Cheap green dye CD-Rs are notorious for losing data just after a few weeks. These unstable dye CD-Rs cannot tolerate even the slightest change in temperature, humidity or UV light even tho the manufacturer has published test results like 75 years longevity (anybody remember the Magneto-Optical spec wars ?). Be aware that even quality green dye CD-Rs can lose data after a year. This has been going on for a decade now. Still, very few buyers are aware of this problem. For critical longevity use gold-stabilized clear dye. End copied message Regards Yuri.
RE: filmscanners:Focusing film flatness
At 12:49 PM 4/04/01 EDT, Rich wrote: ...they ended up relenting and giving me a much better lens with sufficient depth of field This is an interesting statement. The only things that affects depth of field in a lens is its apeture or focal length. A 'much better lens' doesn't necessarily imply either. ... But ... a lens with a somewhat concave field is actually an advantage since it would give you a sharp image on a curved surface. In the projector business, it is likely that a 'better lens' has a slightly curved field to match the assumed curvature of a slide. Yep, they told me that the 'average' projector lens is just designed for a flat plane, as you suggest. But the new one they gave me, a Leitz Colorplan I think it is, was designed for a slightly curved plane, in the direction that most slides bow. I presume they designed it for a middle ground - it certainly does cope very well with flat slides as well as the typical cardboard job, and of course those slides that 'pop' as they heat up from the light. (Was the bowing deliberately done by Kodak to avoid that, I wonder?? Back in those days, I would imagine the vast majority of slides were destined for projection, rather than the enlarger or a film-scanner, where flatness is much more of a virtue!) Increasing a projector lens' depth of field by reducing it's apeture is impractical since it would result in a much dimmer image on the screen. I didn't take notice of any aperture restriction. (It's stored at the moment, and I'm too lazy to drag it out and look!) But I wonder just how much restriction you would need to gain the required result? This is heading off-topic, so no answer required! So the question is, are the lenses in film scanners flat field, or are they slightly dished to accomodate film curvature? Or are some small apeture, high depth of field lenses working with more sensitive ccds. Tony praises a fixed focus Minolta scanner which would have to fit the later category. How about some others? I know my Acer copes well in this area, so I just decided to push it and find out. I put 2 bowed slides in, one reversed, got it to focus on the first (which I presume it does towards the centre of frame) and scanned both at the same focus plane. Sure enough, first one was sharp, inc. corners, second one was blurred in centre, although the edges were OK.. That tells me that the depth of field is just about right, maybe 0.4mm (?) as a wild guess.. Regards, Mark T. == Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
Re: filmscanners:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 23:01:56 -0500 home ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have recently bought a minolta dimage scan II and I am new to film scanning. I would really appreciate if any of you could point me to a site which has a few pictures scanned on some of the real expensive (600$)scanners at high resolutions (=2700dpi). You are unlikely to find them, because of the horrnedous size of uncompressed high-res images. I could upload a Polaroid 4000 .tif, but it would use up 58.5Mb of my 30Mb webspace allowance :) and you may not want to download it either. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 14:09:53 +0800 Honda Lo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Dear Tony, in fact, 2740S compare to 2720S, we improved the A/D from 12bit to 14bit Thanks - I did not realise this. The other hand is co-work with ASF to have ICE function inside, due to we're not using LED light as our light-source, so we need to scan twice to check the place of dust scratch. Intruiging! So you do ICE without an IR channel! Everybody has guessed that you had added an IR LED - and we are all wrong. To be the best " Value of Money " is our insist in this area, we'll continue to prompt more good with good quality and reasonable price. I think you will find that most people here regard the Acer as good enough to stand comparison with much more expensive models, especially for slides. If you added individual RGB channel exposure control, you would improve the scanning of colour negatives - the main users' complaint is that the Acer's remove the orange mask in software. It is very good to have another manufacturer representative here, and I think you will gain a lot of useful feedback. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 12:46:48 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Have you tried a 3rd party profile? I am tempted to get one of Jon Cone's profiles for the 1160 http://www.pixl.dk/ is apparently the man - he has a very good rep for producing custom Epson profiles for your choice of ink/paper, using a spectrophotometer. You send him a print from his calibration file off the website + $140 and he sends you a custom profile. I may try this as an alternative to throwing the 1200 down the stairs. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Crashes with Nikon LS4000
Mikael Risedal wrote: Nikon have done the same mistake as Polaroid did with the pree released Sprintscan 4000 1.5 years ago. The Polaroid software Insight was terrible. ( Im not sure if it works today) The Nikon ED 4000 and software are not optimized and ready for the market yet. Thanks for the info. What I received from Nikon is not supposed to be "pre-release", I have not got some early version to test but a regular order through my local shop. I admit that I was very surprised when they called to say that my order was ready. Polaroid 4000 and Nikon LS2000 comes together with Silverfast 5 (here in Sweden) and the scanners works well.. In Switzerland the only thing that is bundled with the ED 4000 is FotoStation.Silverfast was bundled with the LS2000 but it looks as if this agreement has been dropped - or Silverfast doesn't support the ED 4000 Only hope Nikon does the same thing with ED4000 as a choice to NikonScan. I think NikonScan can be a good software in next up date, it has the basic quality and have not so many errors as Insight in the beginning. Agreed, I quite like Nikon Scan 2.5 and the 3.0 has some interesting new features. If only it would not crash all the time, I would be happy. Jeremy
RE: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
--- You wrote: I think you will find that most people here regard the Acer as good enough to stand comparison with much more expensive models, especially for slides. If you added individual RGB channel exposure control, you would improve the scanning of colour negatives - the main users' complaint is that the Acer's remove the orange mask in software. --- end of quote --- It would be especially good to add Macintosh support! A Mac Photshop plug-in might sell me on this scanner! I hesitate to buy a piece of hardware that requires me to COUNT on third party software, Rich
RE: filmscanners: AcerScanwit wishlist
At 07:46 AM 5/04/01 +, Tony wrote: ..I think you will find that most people here regard the Acer as good enough to stand comparison with much more expensive models, especially for slides. No arguments from me as a pretty happy Acer user.. if we can control grain-aliasing/noise on negatives, I'll be deliriously content! (almost) :) If you added individual RGB channel exposure control, you would improve the scanning of colour negatives - the main users' complaint is that the Acer's remove the orange mask in software. While I agree that manual exposure control is high on the wishlist, that's not why - if I just tell Miraphoto (v1.1) it's a slide I get a nice orange scan.. Is anyone else on the list having this problem? By the way, I'm currently liasing with some other Acer users to discuss a small(-ish!) wish list to give to Honda. If anyone else wants to join in, please say so (to me off-list) quickly! Regards, Mark T. == Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
I just wanted to mention to any Acer Scanwit clients and others who want to provide suggestions and guidance to Acer on new filmscanner products or features, that Mr. Honda Lo contacted me via email and seems genuinely interested in feedback from end users, particularly about software improvements, or product that could be bundled with the Acer line. People who wish to provide comments and ideas should contact him in private email at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The company seems genuinely interested in improving their market share by providing good value and responding to customer needs. He seems particularly interested in what improvements are needed in the software What software products should be bundled with the scanner What the next model should incorporate I've no vested interest here, other than I support companies that come from the value approach, rather than charging for their name or current market position. This might be a good opportunity for people to express their needs and desires to a manufacturer. Art
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Tony Sleep wrote: The other hand is co-work with ASF to have ICE function inside, due to we're not using LED light as our light-source, so we need to scan twice to check the place of dust scratch. Intruiging! So you do ICE without an IR channel! Everybody has guessed that you had added an IR LED - and we are all wrong. You might be jumping to conclusions here, Tony. If the white light source used has IR in it, they may still be using an IR channel, but doing it as a separate scan. It is possible Honda was simply comparing this to Nikon, which uses R, G, B and IR LED info. Perhaps it was easier to incorporate the IR scan separately rather than do it per scan line, as might be done with other non-LED scanners. Again, some have mentioned that doing this two scan process might lead to somewhat off registered scans, and if this is the case, it could make an inferior IR overlay for dust and scratch removal. Art
filmscanners: OT: my postings here
It has been brought to my attention by one subscriber here that my postings to filmscanners (and only mine) show up in his mail reader (Netscape) as "read messages" when he receives them. I use Netscape 6 to read my mail and to compose my responses. I also receive my own messages as "read" from Filmscanners and other lists I belong to, but all this time I assumed it was a "smart" feature in Netscape to let me know which messages were my own. If others are experiencing the same thing with my posts here, please let me know IN PRIVATE MAIL which software you use to read the list with. Please email me at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you Art
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
"Tony Sleep" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: spectrophotometer. You send him a print from his calibration file off the website + $140 and he sends you a custom profile. I may try this as an alternative to throwing the 1200 down the stairs. Jon Cone's company www.inkjetmall.com and www.profilecity.com do a similar thing. The profilecity profiles are US$100 and the inkjetmall ones are $120 for a custom profile or only $49 for a set one eg Epson Photo Paper with OEM ink for the 1200. I was considering one of those as a possible improvement over OEM for my 1160 and EPP. Unfortunately they don't have off-the-shelf profiles for heavyweight matte or archival matte. :( Rob
Re: filmscanners: Burning CD's
If one follows the creativepro url that has been offered on a number of messages to the Computer Media Testing web pages, which go into much more detail about the different types of dyes, reflective coatings, and even track density and angles, types of laser, etc. etc. you will find the pure gold sputtered disks are rated more poorly than the silver and gold mixed disks. It has something to do with the transparency of the gold layer, and other physical properties. Obviously, this is a very complex and to date, completely non-standardized system, and its anyone's guess what will work best, what will be most universally read, and what will last the longest. We a guinea pigs in this evolving media. Art Lynn Allen wrote: Tim wrote: Note that kodak doesn't make gold disks anymore - only the new silver alloy ones or something. I think Quantegy may still make them? I've note exactly that, unhappily (I don't mind paying for something that will last). What's the "Next Best Thing?" --LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
filmscanners: Silverfast
Hi everyone I'm back. Last time I spent quite some time complaining about how Silverfast would lock your machine if you had anything on your PC IDE controllers other than Hard disk drives and CD ROMs. So its time to redress the balance. I would like to congratulate them on fixing the problem. At least I think they have, but as I have a somewhat different PC as well as a new version of Silverfast I can only be sure if I reinstall the other version . Anyway I am a happy punter, Silverfast works and works well. Steve
filmscanners: Where to buy a Minolta Scan Elite
Hi, After much research I have decided that a Minolta Scan Elite will probably suit my needs, however I want to do a couple of test scans before I part with that much cash. I was all set to go to Jessops (who had it listed at 699), however they now tell me it is obsolete and they no longer sell it. Firstly, is it really obsolete, or is it just Jessops that have stopped stocking it. It is still listed on Minolta's web site and they don't appear to have anything new with similar features, so I am guessing it is just Jessops. Secondly, can anyone recommend somewhere where I can go to try one before I buy it. I live in Cambridge, UK. I'd prefer somewhere local, but am prepared to travel as far as London if necessary. Thanks, Martin Wiseman.
RE: filmscanners: Burning CD's
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 15:14:33 -0400 (EDT) Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Note that kodak doesn't make gold disks anymore - only the new silver alloy ones or something. Kodak Gold, Gold+Silver and Silver are all freely available in UK, and no sign of discontinuation of the Gold. I suspect you are just seeing retailers stocking policy - they are probably getting a preferential, promotional margin on the new Gold+Silver, or just stocking what they think they will sell most. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 15:11:19 -0400 (EDT) Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm shocked at the 6 min, 9 sec scan time with ICE at high quality It's a long time. But I have frequently spent 30+mins manually doing what ICE does. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: FS: Nikon LS-2000
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 15:06:42 -0400 Lawrence smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I could not find whether it is ok to post this sort of thing so if it is a no-no I apologize. I have a Nikon LS-2000 that I am going to sell. No need to apologise, private sales of filmscanners are fine. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
filmscanners: Scanwit (was: AcerScanwit wishlist
Mark wrote: if I just tell Miraphoto (v1.1) it's a slide I get a nice orange scan.. Is anyone else on the list having this problem? No, not lately--I've been doing negs exclusively since Xmas. But working back and forth *does* seem to mess things up, sometimes. Don't know if it's software or firmware--possibly both. The "nice orange scan" is probably a holdover from a previous neg scan, where some setting is "sticking." So your idea about the software recalibrating itself each time the carrier is removed is definitely valid. OTOH, I often scan a batch of film that was with the same film and camera (although not necessarily the same day or exposure), and prefer to simply "Preview" the second and third batch at the same settings. Personally, I'd rather the "Reset Calibration" command were more positive, and negated ALL of the previous settings instead of just *some* of them, as seems be the case in the current version of Mira (and sometimes, believe it or not, translates to non-Twain Vuescan, as well!). In dire circumstances (which I seem to have more than my share of), a positive "Reset" button on the Scanwit itself would certainly put my mind at ease. At least I'd *know* that I had to start recalibration all over again, and would be doing it "from scratch." I've mentioned this to Acer techs, but don't know if they were actually "listening." Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Art wrote: some have mentioned that doing this two scan process might lead to somewhat off registered scans, and if this is the case, it could make an inferior IR overlay for dust and scratch removal. What part and how big a part would resolution and reproduction size play in this scenario? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
filmscanners: Silverfast Ai HDR option
I have Silverfast Ai and IT8 (supplied with the Artixscan 4000) and with this software it is possible to output HDR scans which are the raw data. I think that the best scans to archive are the raw files. As later you can return to these and use new better processing techniques become available without having to rescan the image. In the past I have found trying to use the HDR option extremely difficult without the Silverfast HDR software. But now Silverfast have included a tick box that allows the gamma (2.2 windows) correction to be applied to an HDR scan. For some reason I always ended up with loads of noise if I used Photoshop to apply the gamma correction. With the new option Silverfast a gamma corrected raw scan can be loaded into Photoshop 6 and by assigning the Silverfast Calibration profile and then converting it to the internal profile. This gives you an almost identical result to the usual Silverfast Ai output but you get to work on the full 12bit data in photoshop. For the lazy auto levels in PS6 produces a very similar result to the auto adjustments in Silverfast. Most of the simpler to use functions in silverfast can be performed in PS6 and it can all be done at 48 bit resolution. I am no expert but this seems to work well for slides. Negatives are probably all together different due to Silverfast specialist colour cast removal algorithms. What are the downsides ? Steve
filmscanners: Silverfast lamp lightness option
Reading Ian lyons very helpful tutorial "Silverfast 5 and the Polaroid SS4000 : Part 1 - Basic steps to IT-8 calibration", I found he used a value of 10 for lamp lightness. He noted that this allowed him to maximise shadow detail. Sounds good to me, but how do I know what value would be good for my (mechanically) similar Artixscan 4000 ? After a little thought I came up with the following technique: I used IT-8 slide with the HDR option. I made an initial scan and used PS to check the RGB values in the grey scale area for rectangles "0" and "23" which I think should be pure white and pure black respectively. I found the white was well short of 255 in every channel. So I tried progressively higher values in lamp control until it became almost completely 255 in every channel. I then backed the lamp control off until the values were generally 255/254 in every channel. This by my reckoning maximised the bandwidth as the black was still showing RGB 0/1 or sometimes 2. I then recalibrated using the IT8 slide. I checked a before and after scan nd I do not appear to have introduced loads of noise. My final value was 24 where as Ian ended up at 10. Does my technique of arriving at the final lamp setting make sense ? Can anyone suggest anything better ? Any nasty flaws ? Steve
filmscanners: ColorSteps?
I don't know if color steps is the right term but it seems to be a display problem. In several high resolution scans, I've seen some odd areas of color that should be continuous appear to step from one tone to another as though displayed in 256 colors or fewer. One was a reflective surface with some specualr highlighs (a polished truck fender) and another was may daughter's softly lit cheek. It's a high res 24 bit Photoshop display on the Mac, on a Sony Trinitron monitor. I was thinking there was somthing odd about my antique scanner, but the colors are smooth and continuous in the Epson print. One example is from an Ektachrome slide, the other from a high speed negative film. I thought of the grain aliasing discussed on the list, but I'm not sure what it looks like. It appears in all zoom settings of the display, so aliasing with scan lines wouldn't explain it. In the display it almost looks like the kind of color reversal you can get when you bend a curve too far. It don't show in the print though... weird. Any ideas? Rich
filmscanners: Filmscanners: Should I replace Artixscan 4000 with the Nikon ?
From what I saw on Steve's Digicams the new Nikon looks amazing. Does it really automatically produce such imaculate scans from what can be best described as well worn originals ? I have never completely got the hang of removing flaws in PS and it just takes me forever (around a hour) - it's also quite a strain staring at the screen looking for every last dust speck. I have loads of slides that I still wish to scan and the increased colour depth would no doubt be helpful. Apparently my local shop will flog my Artixscan on commision for just over 500 to me so I'd have to find about 700-800. As I see it - if the Nikon really is that good the benefit in the quality and the saving in my personal time will soon make up for the money. A firewall card would be nice too. So just how good is the Nikon - particularly compared to the Artixscan 4000 and the much the same Polaroid SS4000? Steve
RE: filmscanners: negative and skin tones
Well, what you are supposed to do is to filter the light to the correct colour temp for the film, and then everything takes care of itself. Nice theory :) Colour neg and PS work better for me. No major disagreement from me. My response was tailored to a very specific suggestion in someone's post that one use a filter to correct the skin tones similar to the way one uses a filters in black and white traditional photography to lighten or darken certain combinations of color in the original. You know the old red filter to lighten reds and darken greens sort of thing which results in unanticipated consequences when there is some other color present in the original subject. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 2:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: negative and skin tones On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 18:46:19 -0500 Laurie Solomon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I would respond that I do not know of any skin tone filter in traditional photography. Color skin tones are made up of a number of different colors and tonalities such that no single filter or filter pack will usually work when shooting the film. Well, what you are supposed to do is to filter the light to the correct colour temp for the film, and then everything takes care of itself. Nice theory :) Colour neg and PS work better for me. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: ColorSteps?
Hi, I think "posterization" is the term you are looking for. You can check it out in Photoshop by selecting the area and examining the histogram (levels). Very interesting that it prints out okay! Sorry I don't have any idea what the cause is. Jon ps "grain aliasing" just looks like a grainy image. --- Richard Starr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know if color steps is the right term but it seems to be a display problem. In several high resolution scans, I've seen some odd areas of color that should be continuous appear to step from one tone to another as though displayed in 256 colors or fewer. One was a reflective surface with some specualr highlighs (a polished truck fender) and another was may daughter's softly lit cheek. It's a high res 24 bit Photoshop display on the Mac, on a Sony Trinitron monitor. I was thinking there was somthing odd about my antique scanner, but the colors are smooth and continuous in the Epson print. One example is from an Ektachrome slide, the other from a high speed negative film. I thought of the grain aliasing discussed on the list, but I'm not sure what it looks like. It appears in all zoom settings of the display, so aliasing with scan lines wouldn't explain it. In the display it almost looks like the kind of color reversal you can get when you bend a curve too far. It don't show in the print though... weird. Any ideas? Rich __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: filmscanners: Canon Flatbed D2400UF
There are two issues involved scanning head speed and data transfer speed. Unless you have dual interfaces it would be difficult to tell if the scanning head is held back by a slower interface. If you consiser a full resolution scan of A4 you get approx 11(inch)*8(inch)*2400*4800*6(16 bit resolution RGB) = roughly 6GB. This will take a minimum of 67.5 minutes on USB and a minimum of 2 minutes on firewire. But since this is really a film scanner list then if we consider the Nikon 4000 claims a 38 second scan time - the best it could achieve via USB is 85 secs. A significant saving I would say but some people are more patient. Assuming you use this for 35mm transparencies the file size would be about 93Mb this is just over 60 seconds on USB and about 1.86 sec firewire. These are the limiting speed of the interface in practice the scanning head speed and how long it takes to position the scanning head all play their part. At 35mm it may be acceptable. But the problem scales up rapidly for larger scans. USB would take 46 secs per square inch of scan firewie 1.38 secs per square inch of scan at best resolution on this scanner. So even medium format is starting to get slow with USB at these sorts of resolution. The Nikon spec shows that the scan head could be moving at over twice the USB speed. Firewire is 400Mbit per sec (50MB) max , USB is 12Mbit max per sec (1.5MB). Steve P.S. How the hell would you process a 6GB image! - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 12:58 PM Subject: filmscanners: Canon Flatbed D2400UF A few people on the list have mentioned this scanner. PCWORLD the US magazine not the UK store has a test of it at http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,44621,00.asp They claim that the USB interface is much slower than a SCSI or Firewire interface and this causes it to get a lower score. I have seen this remark a few times in scanner test recently. How can they say this when they obviously have not tested the scanner with a Firewire interface. it could be the scanner that is the bottleneck not the interface. Or is this being picky Eddie Cairns
RE: filmscanners: Burning CD's
Note that kodak doesn't make gold disks anymore - only the new silver alloy ones or something. Kodak Gold, Gold+Silver and Silver are all freely available in UK, and no sign of discontinuation of the Gold. I suspect you are just seeing retailers stocking policy - they are probably getting a preferential, promotional margin on the new Gold+Silver, or just stocking what they think they will sell most. I don't know; following is from tssphoto's site, where I buy blanks: http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/dg/kodak_cd.html Scroll down to section that begins with: NEWS FLASH - Kodak DISCONTINUES the 'GOLD' Ultima! Because of the high cost of producing a 100% gold layer CD-R, Kodak is replacing this product with a silver/gold alloy reflective layered disc, called the 'Kodak CD-R Ultima'. ... They also write in that section: "There are some Kodak Gold Ultima's (with the 100% gold reflective layer) still floating around the country (although there are none left at Kodak's warehouses). As we come across distributors that still have old stocks of the Gold Ultima, we'll buy up the CD's and offer them to you." -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
What part and how big a part would resolution and reproduction size play in this scenario? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) Empirically, it's unknown. The misregistration of the separate IR pass is purely theoretical -- Ed Hamrick and Acer have confirmed that it *could* happen, but AFAIK nobody's seen it happen yet. So far I've done about 6 rolls and it's been spot on, every time. It would depend on how accurate the Scanwit can position the carrier. I'm sure someone here will be willing to speculate, though. :) -- Todd Radel - [EMAIL PROTECTED] SCHWAG.ORG - Where Freaks and Geeks Come Together http://www.schwag.org/ PGP key available at http://www.schwag.org/~thr/pgpkey.txt
filmscanners: What's MFT
I got my SS4000 back from Polaroid servicing center a couple of days ago. There was a notation that, among other things, an MFT adjustment was made. Any idea of what that is? I have to praise Polaroid for turnaround speed. They got the scanner last thursday, and estimated that they would send it back in 7 to 10 days; it was returned to me, two day delivery, on tuesday. John M,
Re: filmscanners: Canon Flatbed D2400UF
The speed of the PCI bus is at best 33Meg so unless the firewire socket is integrated on the motherboard there is an other possible bottleneck! Firewire is 400Mbit per sec (50MB) max , USB is 12Mbit max per sec (1.5MB). Steve P.S. How the hell would you process a 6GB image! - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 12:58 PM Subject: filmscanners: Canon Flatbed D2400UF A few people on the list have mentioned this scanner. PCWORLD the US magazine not the UK store has a test of it at http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,44621,00.asp They claim that the USB interface is much slower than a SCSI or Firewire interface and this causes it to get a lower score. I have seen this remark a few times in scanner test recently. How can they say this when they obviously have not tested the scanner with a Firewire interface. it could be the scanner that is the bottleneck not the interface. Or is this being picky Eddie Cairns
RE: filmscanners: Burning CD's
http://www.tssphoto.com/sp/dg/kodak_cd.html Scroll down to section that begins with: NEWS FLASH - Kodak DISCONTINUES the 'GOLD' Ultima! Because of the high cost of producing a 100% gold layer CD-R, Kodak is replacing this product with a silver/gold alloy reflective layered disc, called the 'Kodak CD-R Ultima'. ... They also write in that section: "There are some Kodak Gold Ultima's (with the 100% gold reflective layer) still floating around the country (although there are none left at Kodak's warehouses). As we come across distributors that still have old stocks of the Gold Ultima, we'll buy up the CD's and offer them to you." If there aren't any left in the warehouses, it seems odd that Kodak continues to sell: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/store/catalog/Category.jhtml?CATID=6400 Maybe Kodak decided to stop selling to middlemen, and/or maybe they plan to stop making them, but for now the price is ~.50/disk when getting 3 35-pak spindles. I just got 12 spindles.. By the way, on the gold lacquer-only kodaks, I get errors on a music cd after writing w/ a sharpie. Those the mitsui gold's are amazingly transparent. Bill Ross
filmscanners: Microtek Add-On LightLid EL
Anyone tried this slide/neg attachment for the Microtek X6El? Just found it on their web site. Bill
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
At 01:48 PM 5/04/01 -0400, you wrote: What part and how big a part would resolution and reproduction size play in this scenario? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) ...misregistration of the separate IR pass is purely theoretical -- Ed Hamrick and Acer have confirmed that it *could* happen, but AFAIK nobody's seen it happen yet. So far I've done about 6 rolls and it's been spot on, every time. It would depend on how accurate the Scanwit can position the carrier. I'm sure someone here will be willing to speculate, though. :) And you were right! As I think I have mentioned on this list before, I would have thought it would be fairly easy for the scanner software to identify a few dark spots from the IR scan, and then look for a match in the 'real' scan. I mean, isn't that what it does (in a different way) for autofocus..? It's easy to do this sort of stuff if you're not the programmer..:) MT == Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.adelaide.net.au/~markthom
filmscanners: Grain Aliasing at 2700pppi
Grain aliasing and noise has been a regular topic on this list. It should be--Mark, Rob, I and others have been talking at it hard enough. Without any spectacular results, I could add. :-\ It's a pity that TIFFs can't be sent reasonably on the Net, because I just ran up against one that makes the "Tiger" I wrote about into a "pussycat." This new TIFF, done in Vuescan with 6 passes because Miraphoto couldn't handle it, has grain aliasing in every square milimeter! True, it was under-exposed in existing artificial light, hand-held at probably 1/15th or 1/30th tops, with a Pentax 1.8 lens. So what? "There probably isn't enough 'picture there' to make a picture, there," you might say. You've heard it before, said it before, and so have I, more than once. But the thing is, there *is* quite a bit of picture there, and the Scanwit "sees" it. Getting it *out of there* and making it presentable is the difficult part. Most people I know would say, "Give it up, man." Well fine, but I don't think my daughter will be graduating from highschool any time again soon. It's been 22 years since her last go. :-) Every discussion we've had on this list about G-A begs the question "How to deal with it?" We know (or do we?) what causes grain aliasing and/or noise, what films to use in future, what scanners to buy in future, et cetera. But how does one get those hundreds of blue-green pixels out of the dark areas and the red-brown pixels out of the flesh-tones today, this afternoon? That's my question, and I'm stickin' to it. :-) Best regards--LRA PS--BTW, have you noticed that using a soft brush and Cloning smoothes out those offending pixels? Not a lot of help unless one wants to "repaint" the whole picture, but it might be a start. Or not. --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Where to buy a Minolta Scan Elite
Hi Martin, After much research I have decided that a Minolta Scan Elite I've got one. It's a nice scanner. I was all set to go to Jessops (who had it listed at 699), however they now tell me it is obsolete and they no longer sell it. Firstly, is it really obsolete, or is it just Jessops that have stopped stocking it. It is still listed on Minolta's web site and they don't appear to have anything new with similar features, so I am guessing it is just Jessops. Maybe there is some confusion at Jessops: they have been discounting the previous model, the Scan Speed, for some time and perhaps they got mixed up with that. But it certainly isn't listed on the Jessops web site now. (Having said that, with the new Canon and Nikon scanners on the way, I'd be surprised if a replacement for the Elite wasn't too far away.) Secondly, can anyone recommend somewhere where I can go to try one before I buy it. I live in Cambridge, UK. I'd prefer somewhere local, but am prepared to travel as far as London if necessary. Difficult. Jessops don't seem to carry all their stock in all their branches and, even where they have a reasonable stock range, they don't always seem to have demo scanners. There are some London based shops that hire scanners, which might be an option. At least then you could try the Elite and, if you like it, buy it from one of the cheaper retailers. The mail order company Speedgraphic (www.speedgraphic.co.uk) do the Elite for 629 or 669 inc SCSI card, plus 3.90 PP. It might be worth checking availability with them before you go further, in case the Elite really is going to be hard to get. Let us know what you find out! Al Bond
Re: filmscanners: ColorSteps?
Richard Starr wrote: I don't know if color steps is the right term but it seems to be a display problem. In several high resolution scans, I've seen some odd areas of color that should be continuous appear to step from one tone to another as though displayed in 256 colors or fewer. One was a reflective surface with some specualr highlighs (a polished truck fender) and another was may daughter's softly lit cheek. It's a high res 24 bit Photoshop display on the Mac, on a Sony Trinitron monitor. I was thinking there was somthing odd about my antique scanner, but the colors are smooth and continuous in the Epson print. One example is from an Ektachrome slide, the other from a high speed negative film. I thought of the grain aliasing discussed on the list, but I'm not sure what it looks like. It appears in all zoom settings of the display, so aliasing with scan lines wouldn't explain it. In the display it almost looks like the kind of color reversal you can get when you bend a curve too far. It don't show in the print though... weird. Any ideas? Rich This type of posterization can be caused by a number of things like display card problems (often drivers) by a monitor with non-linear color steps, (sometimes adjustable in firmware, depending upon the monitor). Sometimes, I have actually seen this on film (most often Kodachrome) on highlighted areas. The Epson may be "fixing" this problem with some of its driver software, also. Try rescanning at a slightly more carefully corrected white point, you may be running against the wall of the scanners accuracy at the very top of its range. If the scanner is outputting only 8 bits, this could easily be errors in bit accuracy, in which case the best thing might be to scan slightly darker and then adjust a bit in Photoshop (a compromise). Art Art
Re: filmscanners: What's MFT
John Matturri wrote: I got my SS4000 back from Polaroid servicing center a couple of days ago. There was a notation that, among other things, an MFT adjustment was made. Any idea of what that is? Would it be politically incorrect to imply it was a Mutha F*%$#$ Tough Adjustment? ;-) Art I have to praise Polaroid for turnaround speed. They got the scanner last thursday, and estimated that they would send it back in 7 to 10 days; it was returned to me, two day delivery, on tuesday. John M,
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Lynn Allen wrote: Art wrote: some have mentioned that doing this two scan process might lead to somewhat off registered scans, and if this is the case, it could make an inferior IR overlay for dust and scratch removal. What part and how big a part would resolution and reproduction size play in this scenario? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) Best regards--LRA I'm just guessing here, but if the scans were slightly off register, then some of the dust, dirt and scratches wouldn't be removed, while other good parts of the scan might show lightened areas around those defects. I suspect the more you increase the size, the more evident these defects would be. I don't know what the resolution issue would do, as it would probably depend upon under which conditions the film or transport was more likely to deregister. Art
Re: filmscanners: AcerScanwit
Tony Sleep wrote: On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 15:11:19 -0400 (EDT) Lynn Allen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm shocked at the 6 min, 9 sec scan time with ICE at high quality It's a long time. But I have frequently spent 30+mins manually doing what ICE does. As Jack mentioned, in case some people missed it, this is the cumulative time of 4 scans, not just one, so take 1/4th. That is not worse than the Minolta Dimage Scan II does without ICE, and similar to my HP S-20 does, also without any ICE. Spotting can certainly take a long time, but I find I often do other corrections during that time as well that ICE can't possibly be AI enough to know, even if they are "Applied Science Fiction". Art Art
Re: filmscanners: Where to buy a Minolta Scan Elite
on 4/5/01 6:46 AM, Martin Wiseman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, After much research I have decided that a Minolta Scan Elite will probably suit my needs, however I want to do a couple of test scans before I part with that much cash. I was all set to go to Jessops (who had it listed at 699), however they now tell me it is obsolete and they no longer sell it. Firstly, is it really obsolete, or is it just Jessops that have stopped stocking it. It is still listed on Minolta's web site and they don't appear to have anything new with similar features, so I am guessing it is just Jessops. Secondly, can anyone recommend somewhere where I can go to try one before I buy it. I live in Cambridge, UK. I'd prefer somewhere local, but am prepared to travel as far as London if necessary. Thanks, Martin Wiseman. I have a hunch Minolta will replace this scanner with a new model soon. I think some of its features are deficient even in comparison with the Scan Dual II, which makes it appear last generation. With all the new Nikons out now or soon, maybe it won't be too long a wait. -Berry
Re: filmscanners: Canon Flatbed D2400UF
The speed of the PCI bus is at best 33Meg so unless the firewire socket is integrated on the motherboard there is an other possible bottleneck! Eddie, PCI is 33MHz: megahertz, not megabytes. Since PCI is a 32-bit bus, the maximum transfer rate is actually 132MB/sec. And some higher-end machines have 64-bit PCI slots, for 264MB/sec. In reality, other things often limit the bandwidth (interrupt latency, etc.). -- Todd
Re: filmscanners: Grain Aliasing at 2700pppi
I have been changing to LAB and splitting the channels, then applying either a Gaussian blur or Dust and Scratches, depending on the size of the grain, in the A and B channels only. Most of the sharpness remains in the L channel when you recombine. See Dan Margulis's chapter from Professional Photoshop at http://www.ledet.com/margulis/LABCorrection.pdf where he suggests this Maris - Original Message - From: "Lynn Allen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 6:15 PM Subject: filmscanners: Grain Aliasing at 2700pppi | Grain aliasing and noise has been a regular topic on this list. It should | be--Mark, Rob, I and others have been talking at it hard enough. Without any | spectacular results, I could add. :-\ | | It's a pity that TIFFs can't be sent reasonably on the Net, because I just | ran up against one that makes the "Tiger" I wrote about into a "pussycat." | This new TIFF, done in Vuescan with 6 passes because Miraphoto couldn't | handle it, has grain aliasing in every square milimeter! True, it was | under-exposed in existing artificial light, hand-held at probably 1/15th or | 1/30th tops, with a Pentax 1.8 lens. So what? | | "There probably isn't enough 'picture there' to make a picture, there," you | might say. You've heard it before, said it before, and so have I, more than | once. But the thing is, there *is* quite a bit of picture there, and the | Scanwit "sees" it. Getting it *out of there* and making it presentable is | the difficult part. | | Most people I know would say, "Give it up, man." Well fine, but I don't | think my daughter will be graduating from highschool any time again soon. | It's been 22 years since her last go. :-) | | Every discussion we've had on this list about G-A begs the question "How to | deal with it?" We know (or do we?) what causes grain aliasing and/or noise, | what films to use in future, what scanners to buy in future, et cetera. But | how does one get those hundreds of blue-green pixels out of the dark areas | and the red-brown pixels out of the flesh-tones today, this afternoon? | | That's my question, and I'm stickin' to it. :-) | | Best regards--LRA | | PS--BTW, have you noticed that using a soft brush and Cloning smoothes out | those offending pixels? Not a lot of help unless one wants to "repaint" the | whole picture, but it might be a start. Or not. | | | --- | FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com | Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com | | |
filmscanners: Nikonscan 2.5.1
New version of Nikonscan, 2.5.1 http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107c.htm Edwin
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan 2.5.1
Sorry, sent the link to the wrong address. - Original Message - From: Edwin Eleazer To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 9:11 PM Subject: filmscanners: Nikonscan 2.5.1 New version of Nikonscan, 2.5.1 http://www.nikon-euro.com/nikoneuro2/download/Download_107c.htm Edwin
Re: filmscanners: Microtek Add-On LightLid EL
on 4/5/01 6:46 PM, Bill Petitt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone tried this slide/neg attachment for the Microtek X6El? Just found it on their web site. Yeah, I have one. It works fine but the resolution of the X6 is pretty limited (though I love the scanner overall). I got a half decent 11x14 print from a 4x5 neg and a half decent 7x7 print from a 6x6 neg, but to be honest your money is much better spent on an Epson 1640 SU with the tranny hood. Still not ideal, but with this setup I can get a really high quality 20" wide image from a 4x5 neg. If I wanted anything bigger I'd pay for a drum scan. Neither of these units does anything worth a damn with 35mm. Incidentally, if anyone wants to buy an X6 with a tranny hood... -- John Brownlow http://www.pinkheadedbug.com
Re: filmscanners: What's MFT
My guess is that it is MTF (modulation transfer function.) Phil John Matturri wrote: I got my SS4000 back from Polaroid servicing center a couple of days ago. There was a notation that, among other things, an MFT adjustment was made. Any idea of what that is? I have to praise Polaroid for turnaround speed. They got the scanner last thursday, and estimated that they would send it back in 7 to 10 days; it was returned to me, two day delivery, on tuesday. John M,
filmscanners: Genuine Fractals
I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV about 10 days ago that has a full version of Genuine Fractals bundled in. There was no documentation for Genuine Fractals. Altamira's web site is useless. I have loaded Fractals as a plugin to Photoshop 6.0.1. When I tried to use Genuine Fractal, I saved a TIFF file produced by Vuescan to GF's STN file in Photoshop. When I retrieved the file and tried to scale it, I saw a thumbnail of the photo that had a heavy pattern embedded. When I opened the scaled image, the photo had the pattern overlay (I am guessing here) that all but obliterated the image. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Is this a license disabling device? GF came with no instructions and no serial number. I did not even see a serial number insertion on the installation. Any reference to documentation would also be helpful. Thanks, Doug Landrum, Digital Dunce.
Re: filmscanners: Microtek Add-On LightLid EL
Bill Mine came free with my scanner, an X6EL. I tried it a couple of times with 35mm negs and slides and decided it was worth what I paid for it... I think it was one of those ideas that technology passed by. By the time it was readily available, low cost film scanners were too. -- Jim Bill Petitt wrote: Anyone tried this slide/neg attachment for the Microtek X6El? Just found it on their web site. Bill
RE: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals
a full version of Genuine Fractals bundled in. There was no documentation for Genuine Fractals. Altamira's web site is useless. By full version, what do you mean? There are several different full versions of GF ( there is Genuine Fractals 2.0, Genuine Fractals Pro, and Genuine Fractals Light which depending on your definitions is a full version as opposed to a demo version) Which version do you have? Did GF come on a CD? If so, there should be documentation on that CD as well including a readme. As for the web site, I am inclined to disagree with you. You have to work a little to find the pertinent information on the site but much of it - if not all of it - is there. It may not be there under the labels of manual or documentations; instead it may be found under FAQ or some other heading. Was the .tif file you were trying to save as a .stn file a 16 bit file or an 8 bit file? GF does not work with the 16 bit .tif (otherwise named 32 or 48 bit) file, you have to convert them to 8 bit (otherwise known as 24 bit) files. GF also works with flattened files without any layers. Moreover, if the version is GF 2.0 or GF light, it will only work with RBG files. As for it being license disabled, you need to check with Nikon or the scanner documentation, who are responsible for the bundling of the program on that. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Douglas Landrum Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:53 PM To: Scanner List Subject: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV about 10 days ago that has a full version of Genuine Fractals bundled in. There was no documentation for Genuine Fractals. Altamira's web site is useless. I have loaded Fractals as a plugin to Photoshop 6.0.1. When I tried to use Genuine Fractal, I saved a TIFF file produced by Vuescan to GF's STN file in Photoshop. When I retrieved the file and tried to scale it, I saw a thumbnail of the photo that had a heavy pattern embedded. When I opened the scaled image, the photo had the pattern overlay (I am guessing here) that all but obliterated the image. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Is this a license disabling device? GF came with no instructions and no serial number. I did not even see a serial number insertion on the installation. Any reference to documentation would also be helpful. Thanks, Doug Landrum, Digital Dunce.
Re: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals
Contact GF at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good luck. - Original Message - From: "Douglas Landrum" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Scanner List" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 7:52 PM Subject: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV about 10 days ago that has a full version of Genuine Fractals bundled in. There was no documentation for Genuine Fractals. Altamira's web site is useless. I have loaded Fractals as a plugin to Photoshop 6.0.1. When I tried to use Genuine Fractal, I saved a TIFF file produced by Vuescan to GF's STN file in Photoshop. When I retrieved the file and tried to scale it, I saw a thumbnail of the photo that had a heavy pattern embedded. When I opened the scaled image, the photo had the pattern overlay (I am guessing here) that all but obliterated the image. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Is this a license disabling device? GF came with no instructions and no serial number. I did not even see a serial number insertion on the installation. Any reference to documentation would also be helpful. Thanks, Doug Landrum, Digital Dunce.
RE: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals
I just checked the Altamira web site, located at http://206.63.152.155/default.asp I found the following: You have the light version of GF 2.0 bundled with your scanner and you register it from the web site. The site also notes: The Genuine Fractals LE software included in the bundle enables users of the Coolscan line to save images as resolution-free files that can be enlarged far beyond their original size with surprisingly high-quality results. Genuine Fractals 2.0 LE lets you start with up to 8 MB of data in your images and enlarge them up to 64 MB. In short you are limited to 8MB files. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Douglas Landrum Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:53 PM To: Scanner List Subject: filmscanners: Genuine Fractals I bought a Nikon Coolscan IV about 10 days ago that has a full version of Genuine Fractals bundled in. There was no documentation for Genuine Fractals. Altamira's web site is useless. I have loaded Fractals as a plugin to Photoshop 6.0.1. When I tried to use Genuine Fractal, I saved a TIFF file produced by Vuescan to GF's STN file in Photoshop. When I retrieved the file and tried to scale it, I saw a thumbnail of the photo that had a heavy pattern embedded. When I opened the scaled image, the photo had the pattern overlay (I am guessing here) that all but obliterated the image. Does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Is this a license disabling device? GF came with no instructions and no serial number. I did not even see a serial number insertion on the installation. Any reference to documentation would also be helpful. Thanks, Doug Landrum, Digital Dunce.
Re: filmscanners: What's MFT
In a message dated 4/5/2001 5:39:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: John Matturri wrote: I got my SS4000 back from Polaroid servicing center a couple of days ago. There was a notation that, among other things, an MFT adjustment was made. Any idea of what that is? Would it be politically incorrect to imply it was a Mutha F*%$#$ Tough Adjustment? ;-) Art I have to praise Polaroid for turnaround speed. They got the scanner last thursday, and estimated that they would send it back in 7 to 10 days; it was returned to me, two day delivery, on tuesday. John M, Congratulations on your success with repair of your SprintScan 4000. I had different results and posted my problems with Polaroid's service here a month or so ago. I sent mine to Polaroid's east coast repair center here in the U.S. a total of three times. It was never returned until I called to ask about it. They seemed to never know where it was or what its status was, but usually returned it promptly after I called, but always unrepaired. David Hemingway read my post here and knew where to kick the sleeping dogs at Polaroid (between the legs, below the tail, I would presume). I soon received a new replacement in exchange for my problem scanner. (Thank the gods for beer, beautiful women, and men like David Hemingway!) I'm now a happy camper and my SS4000 seems to work just fine. However, now I'm trying to figure out how the undocumented Insight and poorly documented Silverfast software works. No one on the list offered to help me figure it out following my last post. Maybe I need to buy Vuscan. (LOL, as they say!) By the way, I think Art's politically incorrect definition of MFT may be correct. Only it doesn't have anything to do with your scanner hardware. It has to do with the "adjustment" David applied to the repair department. (LOL all over again.) Anyway, thanks again, David. Polaroid seems to have a very good reputation here on the list, so I'm probably the only person who's had a problem. And you solved it.
