filmscanners: Fun way to spend a Saturday
I bought a used Microtek Snamaker 45t last week, and have been having a bear of a time getting it working on my Win2K machine. So much so that I built a Win NT4 machine today. But though it is intermittently sort of working more than it did under W2k, it still isn't working properly. If anyone has this scanner and uses either W2k or NT4, I'd appreciate an off list reply so that I may pick your brain. Pat [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com
filmscanners: RE: filmscanner: Dust removal software?
Martin, Polaroid offers a program through the dealers called "30 day good as gold guarantee". If you are dissatisfied with the product for any reason you can return it for a full refund minus shipping if necessary) Most dealers honor this program and fortunately we don't have to take many back!! You have heard about the air cans, static brush, the Teknek roller. There is also a technique using the history palette in Photoshop. This or similar technique is taught at trade shows by Imacom. Eddie Tapp of PMA has a PDF of his version of the procedure on his web site. www.eddietapp.com Regards David > -Original Message- > From: Barbara & Martin Greene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 7:08 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: filmscanners: Dust removal software? > > > As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to > come with the > excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can > still return it > and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the > Canonscan 4000 and the Polaroid 4000 as to how these machines > handle it. I > do want to be able to remove some of the junk, but would be > willing to do a > little work the rubber stamp in Photoshop if I could retain a > sharper image. > > Martin >
Re: Getting around the firewire problem was Re: filmscanners: Best film scan...
In a message dated 8/26/2001 4:59:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I've said, if Nikon marketed camera equipment in the same way, regularly making older equipment obsolete, Canon would have squished the company long ago. Nobody pays Nikon prices and then tolerates obsolescence a few years later. The same is even more true for companies like Leica. comparing apples to oranges; filmscanners to camera lenses
Re: filmscanners: VueScan 7.1.12 Available
Ed, Glad to hear that you are progressing with Canon flatbed support. As I e-mailed to you a few months ago, after looking and testing several flatbed scanners (Epson, Microtek, Canon), I purchased a Canon FB 1200S SCSI scanner. The Canon FB 1200S is a reålly nice scanner and was top rated by PC magazine for a year. For serious photo scanning, your VueScan would be a real asset. I have VueScan which recognizes the Canon 1200S scanner, but Prescan and Scan do not work. I know it takes some effort to fully implement support for the Canon 1200S, but perhaps you are part way with the other Canon support. Any chance that we could convince you to add this support? Computer is Mac G3/300 minitower (beige). Best regards, Bob At 12:44 PM -0400 9/1/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I just released VueScan 7.1.12 for Windows, Mac OS 8/9/X >and Linux. It can be downloaded from: > > http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html > >What's new in version 7.1.12 > > * Added splash screen on startup (Windows and Linux) > > * Added support for Epson Perfection 1250, 1650 and 2450 > > * Added support for Epson GT-2200 > > * Added preliminary support for additional Canon flatbeds > > * Added support for negative "Device|Frame offset (mm)" values > > * Fixed problem with changed disk file name not updating the > visibility of "Filter|Infrared clean" > >Regards, >Ed Hamrick --
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
Jawed Ashraf wrote: > Just one point: negatives get scratched, seemingly routinely by labs. I > bought the LS40 for ICE, *specifically* because of scratches which were > driving me barmy. Dust, by comparison, was giving me little problem. So I > don't fall into the group: "people who sing the praises of ICE are people > who have a dust problem". I have a scratches problem. (I am now the proud > owner of a digicam and intend never to shoot film again - well, I suppose > I'll release the shutter on someone else's camera with film in it, if they > like...) > > So if you have negs that are scratched, then you still have to seriously > consider ICE. > > If you solely shoot slides and store them well then you prolly have very > very few scratches to deal with, ever. I think Roger is right, you can then > remove the dust (brushing/blowing and rubber stamping) and forget ICE. > With regards to labs scratching negs and not slides: Perhaps you are using the wrong lab? Most high end E-6 machines are 'dip & dunk', and that goes for high end C41 developing machines as well. Most scratches (in development) are caused by roller transport machinesSo perhaps it would be better to find a lab with a dip & dunk machine? Harvey Ferdschneider partner, SKID Photography, NY
RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
When I got my SS4k, I wanted a cover for it...you know, one of those plastic covers that you would expect a precision optical device would, if not come with, would be available from the manufacturer...so when not in use, it wouldn't allow any dust to get inside it... Well, much to my surprise, they didn't offer one! I was astounded... I have a Leafscan 45 (as he said pounding his chest wildly... it's an inside joke ;-). It has filtered air that pressurizes the film chamber, therefore taking any dust that gets in there, out. I must admit, I get virtually no dust when scanning, after proper cleaning that is. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Barbara & Martin > Greene > Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:53 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software? > > > Austin > > I agree as I am certain that a significant part of my dust problem, > certainly not all, is within the scanner. The problem was even worse at > first, until, on the recommendation of Nikon tech support, I blew it out > with a pressure can. I intend to do tests to try and determine > if there are > spots that remain the same on several slides. I'd appreciate if > you'd tell > me what scanner has a "positive pressure film chamber." Also, > how does the > chamber help? > > Martin > > > From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:37:00 -0400 > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software? > > > > > >> To avoid > >> dust, just take care of your transparencies! > > > > It is not necessarily that simple, though your suggestion is first and > > foremost. The SS4k and other scanners like it, can have a dust > problem, no > > matter how clean your film is going into the scanner. These > scanners can > > have dust internally...that no matter what you do, save a clean > room, will > > get *some* dust on your perfectly clean film. > > > > Scans from my SS4k almost always had one or more dust spots, no > matter what > > I did...and once I switched to a scanner that has a positive > pressure film > > chamber the dust problem went away. > > >
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
Austin I agree as I am certain that a significant part of my dust problem, certainly not all, is within the scanner. The problem was even worse at first, until, on the recommendation of Nikon tech support, I blew it out with a pressure can. I intend to do tests to try and determine if there are spots that remain the same on several slides. I'd appreciate if you'd tell me what scanner has a "positive pressure film chamber." Also, how does the chamber help? Martin > From: "Austin Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:37:00 -0400 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software? > > >> To avoid >> dust, just take care of your transparencies! > > It is not necessarily that simple, though your suggestion is first and > foremost. The SS4k and other scanners like it, can have a dust problem, no > matter how clean your film is going into the scanner. These scanners can > have dust internally...that no matter what you do, save a clean room, will > get *some* dust on your perfectly clean film. > > Scans from my SS4k almost always had one or more dust spots, no matter what > I did...and once I switched to a scanner that has a positive pressure film > chamber the dust problem went away. >
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
> I > suppose an anti-static brush would help. > Hersch > Anyone have an opinion about what are advertised as natural fiber antistatic brushes as opposed to staticmaster brushes? John M.
RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
Nice advice. Just one point: negatives get scratched, seemingly routinely by labs. I bought the LS40 for ICE, *specifically* because of scratches which were driving me barmy. Dust, by comparison, was giving me little problem. So I don't fall into the group: "people who sing the praises of ICE are people who have a dust problem". I have a scratches problem. (I am now the proud owner of a digicam and intend never to shoot film again - well, I suppose I'll release the shutter on someone else's camera with film in it, if they like...) So if you have negs that are scratched, then you still have to seriously consider ICE. If you solely shoot slides and store them well then you prolly have very very few scratches to deal with, ever. I think Roger is right, you can then remove the dust (brushing/blowing and rubber stamping) and forget ICE. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 September 2001 17:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software? I've never used ICE, but I do own a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 and am perfectly happy with it. I think that people who sing the praises of ICE are people who have a dust problem, either because of the own making or because of circumstances beyond their control that require them to scan slides that have been abused by someone else. If you do not have a major dust problem and already own a scanner with ICE and are happy with it in all other respects, you can always turn off the ICE feature. The Polaroid is an outstanding machine and at $700 is an outstanding value and I can't understand why anyone would buy anything else. But I believe the $200 rebate ends at the end of this month, so you'll need to act fast if you decide to go that route. My slides come from a professional lab and I do not have a dust problem. After I mount the slides in the carrier, I visually inspect them for dust, use a Staticmaster brush to remove any dust that I do see (this happens with about 20 percent of the slides) and then immediately insert it into the scanner before any dust can settle on it. Many of my slides are of models against a white background, so if there were any dust on the slide, it would be very obvious. But I rarely see it. Occasionally, I will miss a piece of dust which becomes obvious when I do a prescan. I simply use the Staticmaster on the slide again and rescan. But that's very rare. If you were to get the Polaroid SS4000, it will probably come with both Insight software and SilverFast software. More than likely, the SilverFast software will be the old version. It would cost $90US to upgrade to the current 5.5 version ($45 for the Ai part of SilverFast and another $45 for the HDR part, though you could get buy with upgrading only HDR and still have available all of the features of the upgrade). If you are a professional photographer who requires the use of the scanner in your business, I'd recommend against upgrading SilverFast. The old version is great for slides. But the upgraded version is extremely buggy and is not usable at all with my SS4000 because it won't scan the entire slide and the actual scan doesn't match the crop box of the prescan. (The same SilverFast software is also unusable with my SS120 medium format scanner as it causes crashes.) The SilverFast company has been very unresponsive to my problems. If you scan negatives rather than slides, the SilverFast upgrade which includes something called NegaFix sounds promising. But as I said, the SilverFast upgrade is buggy and doesn't work with my SS4000. Insight was supposedly upgrade recently and I believe it is supposed to work better with negatives than it used to. David Hemingway of Polaroid hangs out on this list (another major advantage of buying a Polaroid) and can tell you more about Insight as I haven't used it due to spending all of my waking moments trying to troubleshoot SilverFast. And of course, Vuescan has a good reputation on this list (I haven't used it yet) especially for negative film. It only costs $40 with a lifetime of upgrades for as many scanners as you'll ever own. So my recommendations are: 1) Don't worry about dust if you take reasonably good care of your slides and negatives. 2) Buy the Polaroid SS4000, which is very good scanner for a very good price. 3) Use Vuescan for scanning negatives. 4) Use the old version of SilverFast for scanning slides, though if you don't want to invest the time in learning how to use it, Vuescan might be OK. 5) Stay away from the SilverFast upgrade until (if?) they get their problems fixed. In a message dated 9/1/2001 4:11:01 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to come with the excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can still return it and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the Canonscan 4
RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
Also, I get my negatives back from the lab in translucent plastic holders, 4 negs long. They are clean when they went in. But, when I remove them, they inevitably have a static charge, which attracts any dust in the air. I suppose an anti-static brush would help. Hersch At 12:37 PM 09/01/2001, you wrote: > To avoid > dust, just take care of your transparencies! It is not necessarily that simple, though your suggestion is first and foremost. The SS4k and other scanners like it, can have a dust problem, no matter how clean your film is going into the scanner. These scanners can have dust internally...that no matter what you do, save a clean room, will get *some* dust on your perfectly clean film. Scans from my SS4k almost always had one or more dust spots, no matter what I did...and once I switched to a scanner that has a positive pressure film chamber the dust problem went away.
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
Title: Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software? Roger Thanks so very much for your thorough, thoughtful and very comprehensive response to my query. At this point I'm not sure how much of my dust problem is due to stuff on my slides and how much is in the scanner itself. Yes, if I could minimize the dust, and I'm going to work on that, then I wouldn't could scan without the ICE and my problem would be gone. Then, the next question is whether or not to stick with the Coolscan or to save money and switch to a polaroid. Martin From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 12:52:08 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software? I've never used ICE, but I do own a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 and am perfectly happy with it. I think that people who sing the praises of ICE are people who have a dust problem, either because of the own making or because of circumstances beyond their control that require them to scan slides that have been abused by someone else. If you do not have a major dust problem and already own a scanner with ICE and are happy with it in all other respects, you can always turn off the ICE feature. The Polaroid is an outstanding machine and at $700 is an outstanding value and I can't understand why anyone would buy anything else. But I believe the $200 rebate ends at the end of this month, so you'll need to act fast if you decide to go that route. My slides come from a professional lab and I do not have a dust problem. After I mount the slides in the carrier, I visually inspect them for dust, use a Staticmaster brush to remove any dust that I do see (this happens with about 20 percent of the slides) and then immediately insert it into the scanner before any dust can settle on it. Many of my slides are of models against a white background, so if there were any dust on the slide, it would be very obvious. But I rarely see it. Occasionally, I will miss a piece of dust which becomes obvious when I do a prescan. I simply use the Staticmaster on the slide again and rescan. But that's very rare. If you were to get the Polaroid SS4000, it will probably come with both Insight software and SilverFast software. More than likely, the SilverFast software will be the old version. It would cost $90US to upgrade to the current 5.5 version ($45 for the Ai part of SilverFast and another $45 for the HDR part, though you could get buy with upgrading only HDR and still have available all of the features of the upgrade). If you are a professional photographer who requires the use of the scanner in your business, I'd recommend against upgrading SilverFast. The old version is great for slides. But the upgraded version is extremely buggy and is not usable at all with my SS4000 because it won't scan the entire slide and the actual scan doesn't match the crop box of the prescan. (The same SilverFast software is also unusable with my SS120 medium format scanner as it causes crashes.) The SilverFast company has been very unresponsive to my problems. If you scan negatives rather than slides, the SilverFast upgrade which includes something called NegaFix sounds promising. But as I said, the SilverFast upgrade is buggy and doesn't work with my SS4000. Insight was supposedly upgrade recently and I believe it is supposed to work better with negatives than it used to. David Hemingway of Polaroid hangs out on this list (another major advantage of buying a Polaroid) and can tell you more about Insight as I haven't used it due to spending all of my waking moments trying to troubleshoot SilverFast. And of course, Vuescan has a good reputation on this list (I haven't used it yet) especially for negative film. It only costs $40 with a lifetime of upgrades for as many scanners as you'll ever own. So my recommendations are: 1) Don't worry about dust if you take reasonably good care of your slides and negatives. 2) Buy the Polaroid SS4000, which is very good scanner for a very good price. 3) Use Vuescan for scanning negatives. 4) Use the old version of SilverFast for scanning slides, though if you don't want to invest the time in learning how to use it, Vuescan might be OK. 5) Stay away from the SilverFast upgrade until (if?) they get their problems fixed. In a message dated 9/1/2001 4:11:01 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to come with the excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can still return it and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the Canonscan 4000 and the Polaroid 4000 as to how these machines handle it. I do want to be able to remove some of the junk, but would be willing to do a little work the rubber stamp in Photoshop if I could retain a sharper image. Martin
RE: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
> To avoid > dust, just take care of your transparencies! It is not necessarily that simple, though your suggestion is first and foremost. The SS4k and other scanners like it, can have a dust problem, no matter how clean your film is going into the scanner. These scanners can have dust internally...that no matter what you do, save a clean room, will get *some* dust on your perfectly clean film. Scans from my SS4k almost always had one or more dust spots, no matter what I did...and once I switched to a scanner that has a positive pressure film chamber the dust problem went away.
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
I have a SS4000 and am getting exquisitely sharp and detailed scans that print well to 13x19 on my Epson 1270. How can I say this simply? To avoid dust, just take care of your transparencies! I use a dust removal brush before scanning and then the rubber stamp tool to take care of the few remaining problems. It's worth it for me because I am creating files to be printed at a service bureau on a Lightjet 5000 and displayed as art, so color correction and image management always takes longer than spotting and sharpness is extremely important. Also, if you get a SS4000, buy a plastic sewing machine dust cover to minimize dust getting into the works. Good luck! - Original Message - From: Barbara & Martin Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 7:08 AM Subject: filmscanners: Dust removal software? > As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to come with the > excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can still return it > and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the > Canonscan 4000 and the Polaroid 4000 as to how these machines handle it. I > do want to be able to remove some of the junk, but would be willing to do a > little work the rubber stamp in Photoshop if I could retain a sharper image. > > Martin >
Re: filmscanners: Imacon Question
Anthony Atkielski wrote: > What are your reasons for choosing a used Imacon or comparable scanner as > opposed to a brand-new CCD scanner? How will you be using the scans? First, and foremost: Money We will be outputting for our portfolio, and for a friend who does fine art prints to an Epson 7000 (up to 24" x 30" prints), from 35mm, 6x7 and 4x5 film. Harvey Ferdschneider partner, SKID Photography, NYC > > > We are now seriously considering buying a used Imacon. We would have gone > with a used Scitex Eversmart > > (cheaper), but the actual size of it is an issue in our too small NYC > apartment. Anyway, after reading quite > > a few posts about the Imacon (and other ccd film scanners) there seems to be a > lot of variation in the quality > > of these machines, on a per machine basis.
Re: filmscanners: Dust removal software?
I've never used ICE, but I do own a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 and am perfectly happy with it. I think that people who sing the praises of ICE are people who have a dust problem, either because of the own making or because of circumstances beyond their control that require them to scan slides that have been abused by someone else. If you do not have a major dust problem and already own a scanner with ICE and are happy with it in all other respects, you can always turn off the ICE feature. The Polaroid is an outstanding machine and at $700 is an outstanding value and I can't understand why anyone would buy anything else. But I believe the $200 rebate ends at the end of this month, so you'll need to act fast if you decide to go that route. My slides come from a professional lab and I do not have a dust problem. After I mount the slides in the carrier, I visually inspect them for dust, use a Staticmaster brush to remove any dust that I do see (this happens with about 20 percent of the slides) and then immediately insert it into the scanner before any dust can settle on it. Many of my slides are of models against a white background, so if there were any dust on the slide, it would be very obvious. But I rarely see it. Occasionally, I will miss a piece of dust which becomes obvious when I do a prescan. I simply use the Staticmaster on the slide again and rescan. But that's very rare. If you were to get the Polaroid SS4000, it will probably come with both Insight software and SilverFast software. More than likely, the SilverFast software will be the old version. It would cost $90US to upgrade to the current 5.5 version ($45 for the Ai part of SilverFast and another $45 for the HDR part, though you could get buy with upgrading only HDR and still have available all of the features of the upgrade). If you are a professional photographer who requires the use of the scanner in your business, I'd recommend against upgrading SilverFast. The old version is great for slides. But the upgraded version is extremely buggy and is not usable at all with my SS4000 because it won't scan the entire slide and the actual scan doesn't match the crop box of the prescan. (The same SilverFast software is also unusable with my SS120 medium format scanner as it causes crashes.) The SilverFast company has been very unresponsive to my problems. If you scan negatives rather than slides, the SilverFast upgrade which includes something called NegaFix sounds promising. But as I said, the SilverFast upgrade is buggy and doesn't work with my SS4000. Insight was supposedly upgrade recently and I believe it is supposed to work better with negatives than it used to. David Hemingway of Polaroid hangs out on this list (another major advantage of buying a Polaroid) and can tell you more about Insight as I haven't used it due to spending all of my waking moments trying to troubleshoot SilverFast. And of course, Vuescan has a good reputation on this list (I haven't used it yet) especially for negative film. It only costs $40 with a lifetime of upgrades for as many scanners as you'll ever own. So my recommendations are: 1) Don't worry about dust if you take reasonably good care of your slides and negatives. 2) Buy the Polaroid SS4000, which is very good scanner for a very good price. 3) Use Vuescan for scanning negatives. 4) Use the old version of SilverFast for scanning slides, though if you don't want to invest the time in learning how to use it, Vuescan might be OK. 5) Stay away from the SilverFast upgrade until (if?) they get their problems fixed. In a message dated 9/1/2001 4:11:01 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to come with the excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can still return it and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the Canonscan 4000 and the Polaroid 4000 as to how these machines handle it. I do want to be able to remove some of the junk, but would be willing to do a little work the rubber stamp in Photoshop if I could retain a sharper image. Martin
filmscanners: VueScan 7.1.12 Available
I just released VueScan 7.1.12 for Windows, Mac OS 8/9/X and Linux. It can be downloaded from: http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html What's new in version 7.1.12 * Added splash screen on startup (Windows and Linux) * Added support for Epson Perfection 1250, 1650 and 2450 * Added support for Epson GT-2200 * Added preliminary support for additional Canon flatbeds * Added support for negative "Device|Frame offset (mm)" values * Fixed problem with changed disk file name not updating the visibility of "Filter|Infrared clean" Regards, Ed Hamrick
filmscanners: Nikon IV and 4000 ?
Does the scanning software with these scanners allow one to select the resolution for a scan? For example if I only want/need 2000 dpi, can I make a scan at 2000 dpi which will result in smaller files. If it is possible to make scans are less then the 2900 and 4000 dpi levels, are the possible resolutions "continuously" variable or just a few choices. Thank you and have a nice day. __Gordon Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Nashville, TN 37215USA
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
I'm not surprised. Maris - Original Message - From: "David Lew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 5:27 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems | I have used the demo of vuescan with the canon fs4000 and it works! It's | better than the software that came with the scanner. | | Dave | | | On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) wrote: | | > At 14:49 31-08-01 -0400, Hemingway, David J wrote: | > >"ICE" is what it is. It gets rid of dust at the cost of image sharpness. If | > >that tradeoff is acceptable it will work for him. | > > | |
Re: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan problem
Martin wrote: > My problem is that, in pursuit of perfection and with a reluctant > willingness to spend big bucks, I try to shoot everything with the best of > Canon lenses, though away any shots that aren't tack-sharp, and use films > live Velvia and Provia 100F. Consequently, I am able to see the noise > created by ICE. In my experience ICE doesn't create what I'd call noise. It does soften the image slightly. I haven't tried ICE in Nikonscan 3.1 but Vuescan's IR routine seems to cause less softening than ICE IMO. If you are really after every bit of sharpness, you'll have to live with spending a long time cloning spots out. I find with films like Provia 100F the slight loss of sharpness helps mask whatever miniscule amount of grain there may be. It's your call - I don't have the luxury of hours and hours to spot my hand. IR channel cleaning makes it possible to scan significant numbers of frames; any slight loss of sharpness is worth it. Rob
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
Martin: I learned the hard way early on. Yes, I did blow some of the propellant on a few negatives until I concluded it was my carelessness and not the fault of the canned air. I am now always careful that the can has not been shaken and it is upright. I have a friend that uses the anti-static brushes with success. I have not tried them. Bob - Original Message - From: "Barbara & Martin Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 6:58 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > Bob > > I've always been concerned about blowing air on my slides with a pressure > can. I'm afraid that some bad stuff will get on the slide. Am I being > overly cautious? > > Martin > > > From: "rlb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:00:43 -0400 > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > > > > I think that depends on the condition of the transparency/negative. I > > always clean my negs before scanning. Some require only a squirt of air and > > others may require more. However, I will only use ICE if the negative is in > > really bad condition which is rare. > > > > Bob > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "geoff murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:33 AM > > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > > > > > >> Time to change to a professional lab?? > >> > >> > >> and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches > >>> and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in > >> Photoshop > >>> doing that myself. > >>> > >> > >> > > >
Re: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
I have recently downloaded the trial version of Vuecan but have not tried it yet. Bob - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 6:42 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > In a message dated 8/31/2001 2:50:18 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > That's exactly my findings as well. I have had my Nikon 8000 for about a > > month and I was anxious to try it with ICE. The first negative I scanned > > without ICE and I scanned the exact negative with ICE. The only changes > > that I made was the ICE portion. In my opinion there was noticeable > quality > > difference between the two. I preferred the scan WITHOUT ICE and have not > > used it since. > > Could you check VueScan's "Filter|Infrared clean" option? It only > smooths the image in the vicinity of the dust spots, not the whole image. > > Regards, > Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan problems
At 23:40 31-08-01 -0400, you wrote: >Cary > >Can you tell me in detail how vuescan might help to remove crud and >improve sharpness in the Nikon Super coolscan 4000. Download a trial copy and see if you're pleased with the results. It doesn't cost anything to try it. All the film that I've scanned has been 30 years old or more. For Ektachromes I use NikonScan and am pleased with the results. For Kodachromes only Vuescan works and it does a very fine job of it. I'd use it for everything but am still much more comfortable with a fully WYSIWYHYG (What You See Is What You Hope You Get) interface. There's some trial and error and fine tuning involved with Vuescan unless you become quite expert with it (which I'm not). Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.com/ -- "Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object." ~Joseph Campbell
filmscanners: Dust removal software?
As I'm not happy with the softening of images that seems to come with the excellent dust removal cab abilities of Digital ICE, and can still return it and get another machine. I'd appreciate information from users of the Canonscan 4000 and the Polaroid 4000 as to how these machines handle it. I do want to be able to remove some of the junk, but would be willing to do a little work the rubber stamp in Photoshop if I could retain a sharper image. Martin
filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan problem
Anthony My problem is that, in pursuit of perfection and with a reluctant willingness to spend big bucks, I try to shoot everything with the best of Canon lenses, though away any shots that aren't tack-sharp, and use films live Velvia and Provia 100F. Consequently, I am able to see the noise created by ICE. Martin Jawed writes: > Ah well, it seems the combination of crappy lenses > in the cameras I've used plus the LS40 means that > the softening due to ICE I suffer is negligible in > the grand scheme of things ... Useful resolution for handheld photographs in 35mm usually tops out around 40-50 lp/mm, because of camera shake, focusing errors, and the like. The lens can have an influence, too, and it doesn't have to be a cheap lens; consistently good performance above 40 lp/mm is hard to come by, and usually requires a very non-cheap lens. Finally, the film itself may have trouble recording beyond 60 lp/mm or so. I use ICE only on color negatives, but I don't notice any obvious softening (on a LS-2000), and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in Photoshop doing that myself. -- Anthony
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
Bob I've always been concerned about blowing air on my slides with a pressure can. I'm afraid that some bad stuff will get on the slide. Am I being overly cautious? Martin > From: "rlb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 06:00:43 -0400 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > > I think that depends on the condition of the transparency/negative. I > always clean my negs before scanning. Some require only a squirt of air and > others may require more. However, I will only use ICE if the negative is in > really bad condition which is rare. > > Bob > > > - Original Message - > From: "geoff murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:33 AM > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > > >> Time to change to a professional lab?? >> >> >> and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches >>> and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in >> Photoshop >>> doing that myself. >>> >> >> >
Re: filmscanners: Re: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
In a message dated 8/31/2001 2:50:18 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > That's exactly my findings as well. I have had my Nikon 8000 for about a > month and I was anxious to try it with ICE. The first negative I scanned > without ICE and I scanned the exact negative with ICE. The only changes > that I made was the ICE portion. In my opinion there was noticeable quality > difference between the two. I preferred the scan WITHOUT ICE and have not > used it since. Could you check VueScan's "Filter|Infrared clean" option? It only smooths the image in the vicinity of the dust spots, not the whole image. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
I think that depends on the condition of the transparency/negative. I always clean my negs before scanning. Some require only a squirt of air and others may require more. However, I will only use ICE if the negative is in really bad condition which is rare. Bob - Original Message - From: "geoff murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:33 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems > Time to change to a professional lab?? > > > and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches > > and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in > Photoshop > > doing that myself. > > > >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
Time to change to a professional lab?? and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches > and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in Photoshop > doing that myself. >
Re: filmscanners: Imacon Question
What are your reasons for choosing a used Imacon or comparable scanner as opposed to a brand-new CCD scanner? How will you be using the scans? - Original Message - From: "SKID Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "scanner group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "scanner group UK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 08:35 Subject: filmscanners: Imacon Question > We are now seriously considering buying a used Imacon. We would have gone with a used Scitex Eversmart > (cheaper), but the actual size of it is an issue in our too small NYC apartment. Anyway, after reading quite > a few posts about the Imacon (and other ccd film scanners) there seems to be a lot of variation in the quality > of these machines, on a per machine basis. > > So our question is: Are we asking for trouble by purchasing a used Imacon, as it could be one of the > 'problematic' ones? > > TIA, > Harvey Ferdschneider > partner, SKID Photography, NYC >
Re: filmscanners: Nikon Super coolscan 4000 Problems
Jawed writes: > Ah well, it seems the combination of crappy lenses > in the cameras I've used plus the LS40 means that > the softening due to ICE I suffer is negligible in > the grand scheme of things ... Useful resolution for handheld photographs in 35mm usually tops out around 40-50 lp/mm, because of camera shake, focusing errors, and the like. The lens can have an influence, too, and it doesn't have to be a cheap lens; consistently good performance above 40 lp/mm is hard to come by, and usually requires a very non-cheap lens. Finally, the film itself may have trouble recording beyond 60 lp/mm or so. I use ICE only on color negatives, but I don't notice any obvious softening (on a LS-2000), and it's much better to have ICE remove the vast number of scratches and spots that the lab leaves on the negatives than to spend hours in Photoshop doing that myself. -- Anthony
