[filmscanners] Re: What can you advise?
Austin, Oh, I got confused. I thought it was going to take something like, at least, a class 100 clean room to get clean scans. -Jim At 12:48 AM 9/27/2002 -0400, Austin Franklin wrote: >Jim, > >Why? Like I do, he simply checks/cleans his negatives before scanning. I >thought he was describing my temporary quarters at first and I have a 1/2 >mile dirt/gravel driveway...I have the exact same environment, except I >don't have a paper cutting farm in my basement. > >One key is either keeping them clean in the first place, and therefore >having to do minor if any, dust removal...or simply doing some level of dust >removal prior to scanning. Also, as even Arthur has corroborated with me >on, different scanners seem, for what ever reason, to have/not have dust >problems, at least the dust is more/less visible, or physically there/not >there. I believe this is reasonably universally known. > >Austin > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of JimD > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:40 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: What can you advise? > > > > > > Art, > > Sheesh, I sure hope Austin doesn't read this! > > -JimD > > > > At 07:03 PM 9/26/2002 -0700, Arthur Entlich wrote: > > >You've raised exactly the crux of the issue. Nikon scanner users have > > >no choice. They must use dICE when it is available to them. > > > > > >I have an admission to make. I live is a rural area, where the air is > > >often dusty. We live on a dirt and gravel road. My digital studio is in > > >a finished basement. It is carpeted with a medium pile rubber backed > > >glued down carpet. Because of all the equipment and furniture I have > > >all over the place in my work area, and all the paper everywhere, and > > >because I still have a lot of magnetically sensitive storage media > > >around, I have only, in the last 10 years vacuumed here twice. It is > > >just too much work to do it. I run part of my business in the same area > > >where I manufacture paper goods which are cut and laminated by the > > >thousands, and create a lot of particulate matter. The area directly > > >connects to an unfinished basement area where I do shop work, auto > > >repair, do airbrush painting, we store our recyclables, etc. and the > > >rafters are covered in cobwebs. We have a 35 year old oil heat central > > >hot air furnace, which is NOT clean, and the ducts have been cleaned > > >exactly NEVER since we moved here, over 20 years ago, and were probably > > >never cleaned since the house was built. Most all of the house is > > >carpeted and the house has stupid blown textured ceilings which not only > > >collect dust, but shed this white plaster-mica mix. We are in an > > >earthquake zone and get hit every few weeks with one which gives the > > >house a good shake. We have a standard low tech filter in the furnace > > >and a electrostatic cleaner (ozone producing) which we run about once a > > >month for a few hours. The chimney and firebox have been cleaned once > > >in 20 years. I occasionally "dust" the digital lab area and I run a > > >manual floor sweeper about once a year, if that, on the exposed areas of > > >the carpet. Other than the spiders, we have no pets. If I run my finger > > >down any flat surface I get a fair wad of paper dust and general dust. > > >I do keep my slide and negs in boxes and holders. I use either a very > > >soft 3/4" wide nylon artist's paintbrush (most of the time) (no radio- > > >isotopes involved) or sometimes I set up an air compressor with a nozzle > > >(only when running a lot of slides through). > > > > > >I print up to 13" wide and sometimes I double that to make proofs with a > > >seam down the middle, so some images get pretty large. Some films are > > >over 20 years old and have been "around", and have some scratches. The > > >SS4000+ scans I do require minimal to no spotting. Rarely do I have to > > >spend more than 2-3 minutes at most to clone and clean images, and that > > >is mostly when it is a very large print. > > > > > >On the other hand, every scan I do on the Minolta Dual Scan II needs > > >some spotting work regardless how much I clean the film and some > > need a lot. > > > > > >If you have only worked with a Nikon or Minolta scanner, you probably > > >think I am speaking from another dimension when I say even under the > > >conditions I have here I need to do very little spotting on those scans. > > > > > >So, now that I have done a true confession, I hope you can still respect > > >me ;-) > > > > > >Art > > > > > > > > > > > >Paul D. DeRocco wrote: > > > > > > > How does one do this? Seal the room and install an air > > filtration system? > > > > Wear a smock, hairnet and gloves? I store slides in boxes with no gaps > > > > between the slides, yet I still find dust on them. I clean > > them with proper > > > > fluid and pads until I can't see anything under a magnifier, pop them > > > in
[filmscanners] RE: Avoiding Newton rings
One would be to replace the glass with anti-newtonian rings glass if it is not already that. Another would be to use an anti-newtonian ring powder on the glass between the negative and the glass. I suppose you could use the two in cnjunction with each other as well as separately. The powder has been around a while and in use in photo labs for sometime - especially the older ones or those that use glass negative carriers. I assume it is still available from a photographic supply house or someplace like Edmund Scientific or another scientific supply house. It is a very fine powder and should not effect the scan significantly as long as you use it sparingly. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Anthony Atkielski Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 7:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Avoiding Newton rings I use the glass 120 film holder on my LS-8000ED because I need to be able to hold the film flat, however, I have a lot of trouble with Newton rings. The weird thing, though, is that some images have multiple instances of the rings, and others have none. This implies that the rings are not inevitable when scanning, only common ... so there must be a way to avoid them. What causes the rings on some images but not on others, and what can I do to avoid them when preparing and loading the film? Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: What can you advise?
Jim, Why? Like I do, he simply checks/cleans his negatives before scanning. I thought he was describing my temporary quarters at first and I have a 1/2 mile dirt/gravel driveway...I have the exact same environment, except I don't have a paper cutting farm in my basement. One key is either keeping them clean in the first place, and therefore having to do minor if any, dust removal...or simply doing some level of dust removal prior to scanning. Also, as even Arthur has corroborated with me on, different scanners seem, for what ever reason, to have/not have dust problems, at least the dust is more/less visible, or physically there/not there. I believe this is reasonably universally known. Austin > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of JimD > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: What can you advise? > > > Art, > Sheesh, I sure hope Austin doesn't read this! > -JimD > > At 07:03 PM 9/26/2002 -0700, Arthur Entlich wrote: > >You've raised exactly the crux of the issue. Nikon scanner users have > >no choice. They must use dICE when it is available to them. > > > >I have an admission to make. I live is a rural area, where the air is > >often dusty. We live on a dirt and gravel road. My digital studio is in > >a finished basement. It is carpeted with a medium pile rubber backed > >glued down carpet. Because of all the equipment and furniture I have > >all over the place in my work area, and all the paper everywhere, and > >because I still have a lot of magnetically sensitive storage media > >around, I have only, in the last 10 years vacuumed here twice. It is > >just too much work to do it. I run part of my business in the same area > >where I manufacture paper goods which are cut and laminated by the > >thousands, and create a lot of particulate matter. The area directly > >connects to an unfinished basement area where I do shop work, auto > >repair, do airbrush painting, we store our recyclables, etc. and the > >rafters are covered in cobwebs. We have a 35 year old oil heat central > >hot air furnace, which is NOT clean, and the ducts have been cleaned > >exactly NEVER since we moved here, over 20 years ago, and were probably > >never cleaned since the house was built. Most all of the house is > >carpeted and the house has stupid blown textured ceilings which not only > >collect dust, but shed this white plaster-mica mix. We are in an > >earthquake zone and get hit every few weeks with one which gives the > >house a good shake. We have a standard low tech filter in the furnace > >and a electrostatic cleaner (ozone producing) which we run about once a > >month for a few hours. The chimney and firebox have been cleaned once > >in 20 years. I occasionally "dust" the digital lab area and I run a > >manual floor sweeper about once a year, if that, on the exposed areas of > >the carpet. Other than the spiders, we have no pets. If I run my finger > >down any flat surface I get a fair wad of paper dust and general dust. > >I do keep my slide and negs in boxes and holders. I use either a very > >soft 3/4" wide nylon artist's paintbrush (most of the time) (no radio- > >isotopes involved) or sometimes I set up an air compressor with a nozzle > >(only when running a lot of slides through). > > > >I print up to 13" wide and sometimes I double that to make proofs with a > >seam down the middle, so some images get pretty large. Some films are > >over 20 years old and have been "around", and have some scratches. The > >SS4000+ scans I do require minimal to no spotting. Rarely do I have to > >spend more than 2-3 minutes at most to clone and clean images, and that > >is mostly when it is a very large print. > > > >On the other hand, every scan I do on the Minolta Dual Scan II needs > >some spotting work regardless how much I clean the film and some > need a lot. > > > >If you have only worked with a Nikon or Minolta scanner, you probably > >think I am speaking from another dimension when I say even under the > >conditions I have here I need to do very little spotting on those scans. > > > >So, now that I have done a true confession, I hope you can still respect > >me ;-) > > > >Art > > > > > > > >Paul D. DeRocco wrote: > > > > > How does one do this? Seal the room and install an air > filtration system? > > > Wear a smock, hairnet and gloves? I store slides in boxes with no gaps > > > between the slides, yet I still find dust on them. I clean > them with proper > > > fluid and pads until I can't see anything under a magnifier, pop them > > in the > > > scanner (LS-2000), and find there's still crap all over them > if I turn off > > > ICE. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco > > > Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > >>From: Austin Franklin > > >> > > >>Well, I'd say if you want the best results from any scanner, > simply keep > > >>your work env
[filmscanners] Re: What can you advise?
Art, Sheesh, I sure hope Austin doesn't read this! -JimD At 07:03 PM 9/26/2002 -0700, Arthur Entlich wrote: >You've raised exactly the crux of the issue. Nikon scanner users have >no choice. They must use dICE when it is available to them. > >I have an admission to make. I live is a rural area, where the air is >often dusty. We live on a dirt and gravel road. My digital studio is in >a finished basement. It is carpeted with a medium pile rubber backed >glued down carpet. Because of all the equipment and furniture I have >all over the place in my work area, and all the paper everywhere, and >because I still have a lot of magnetically sensitive storage media >around, I have only, in the last 10 years vacuumed here twice. It is >just too much work to do it. I run part of my business in the same area >where I manufacture paper goods which are cut and laminated by the >thousands, and create a lot of particulate matter. The area directly >connects to an unfinished basement area where I do shop work, auto >repair, do airbrush painting, we store our recyclables, etc. and the >rafters are covered in cobwebs. We have a 35 year old oil heat central >hot air furnace, which is NOT clean, and the ducts have been cleaned >exactly NEVER since we moved here, over 20 years ago, and were probably >never cleaned since the house was built. Most all of the house is >carpeted and the house has stupid blown textured ceilings which not only >collect dust, but shed this white plaster-mica mix. We are in an >earthquake zone and get hit every few weeks with one which gives the >house a good shake. We have a standard low tech filter in the furnace >and a electrostatic cleaner (ozone producing) which we run about once a >month for a few hours. The chimney and firebox have been cleaned once >in 20 years. I occasionally "dust" the digital lab area and I run a >manual floor sweeper about once a year, if that, on the exposed areas of >the carpet. Other than the spiders, we have no pets. If I run my finger >down any flat surface I get a fair wad of paper dust and general dust. >I do keep my slide and negs in boxes and holders. I use either a very >soft 3/4" wide nylon artist's paintbrush (most of the time) (no radio- >isotopes involved) or sometimes I set up an air compressor with a nozzle >(only when running a lot of slides through). > >I print up to 13" wide and sometimes I double that to make proofs with a >seam down the middle, so some images get pretty large. Some films are >over 20 years old and have been "around", and have some scratches. The >SS4000+ scans I do require minimal to no spotting. Rarely do I have to >spend more than 2-3 minutes at most to clone and clean images, and that >is mostly when it is a very large print. > >On the other hand, every scan I do on the Minolta Dual Scan II needs >some spotting work regardless how much I clean the film and some need a lot. > >If you have only worked with a Nikon or Minolta scanner, you probably >think I am speaking from another dimension when I say even under the >conditions I have here I need to do very little spotting on those scans. > >So, now that I have done a true confession, I hope you can still respect >me ;-) > >Art > > > >Paul D. DeRocco wrote: > > > How does one do this? Seal the room and install an air filtration system? > > Wear a smock, hairnet and gloves? I store slides in boxes with no gaps > > between the slides, yet I still find dust on them. I clean them with proper > > fluid and pads until I can't see anything under a magnifier, pop them > in the > > scanner (LS-2000), and find there's still crap all over them if I turn off > > ICE. > > > > -- > > > > Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco > > Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >>From: Austin Franklin > >> > >>Well, I'd say if you want the best results from any scanner, simply keep > >>your work environment, film storage, scanner etc. free of dust. For many > >>years before "Digital ICE" people made dust free images in both > >>the darkroom > >>and with scanners. > >> > >>IMO, "Digital ICE" is no substitute for sloppy work habits and a > >>sloppy work environment and bad film storage. > >> > > > > > > > > > >Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe >filmscanners' >or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title >or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: What can you advise?
I really tried to get them to re-label and name the features, really I did! If I get a chance over the next few days I will try to put together some of my comments at the time I was beta testing this, and make a better manual. It really isn't that hard to use (although I don't bother with it myself, unless I really have a damage film). Art [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I second that...the not able to make much sense part of it, that is. > > Howard > > > > << Can you give me some guidance on the Polaroid DSR filter settings. I've > tried it a couple of times and can't make much sense from it. >> > > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Minolta Scan Dual III - new
OK, one more comment. Minolta mentions that the Dual Scan II has three new software features, one a color management system for "maintaining color with different monitors", two, something labeled Pixel Polish, which is supposed to do something like ROC, returning color to faded or off color images, and a software automatic dust removal, which I assume is not dICE, which is offered on the Elite II. SOunds like most of this could be upgraded on the Scan II (other than the higher A/D conversion, via new firmware and software. Considering Minolta's current status among their current owners, I strongly suggest they offer this upgrade free of charge to their current Scan II dual owners. Art Lucans, Gunars wrote: > I just came across a webpage for a new version of the Minolta Scan Dual III that I >don't believe I've seen mentioned here: > > http://www.dimage.minolta.com/dual3/index.html > > Gunars > > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: What can you advise?
> > I also have a dehumidifier in my lab...I can't say if that > helps a lot or > > not, but I don't have any dust problems on my stored film. On > film I simply > > leave lying around, perhaps. > > > Actually, a moderate humidity level keeps dust levels down, by reducing > static, and by making the dust heavier and more likely to fall to the > ground. Hi Arthur, Agreed. I keep it at around %45. The circulation of air (and filtering thereof), as the air through the dehumidifier, probably pulls dust off on the damp coil...that's speculation, but sounds right at first thought ;-) > 20-30% humidity is probably optimum in those terms, or you can > get mold growth. I'm curious if you have any references on that. I've not had any mold growth, and it seems quite comfortable...and as I said, no camera, equipment etc. problems at all. It's been a most palatable environment. The dehumidifier is off during winter, probably from October to April. Regards, Austin Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: What can you advise?
Hmmm... This is news to me, but I haven't tried it. Running Win 98 I can use Firewire. (annoying!) Art [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I can't get my SS4000+ to run on Vuescan with a Firewire connection...crashes the >whole system. Anyone else manage it? > Howard > > > >>It will come >>with Silverfast 5.5 and Microtek's driver software, rather than Insight. >>Both also work with Vuescan, a generic scanner software >>which works with >>a wide variety of film and flatbed scanners. >> > > > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Avoiding Newton rings
Newton rings are caused by small variations in the distance between two reflective surfaces. If the surfaces are perfectly parallel, there will be no Newton rings; if the angle between the surfaces is sufficiently great, there will be no visible Newton rings. Only when the surfaces are almost parallel do you see the artifacts. Since we're talking about variations on the order of a few wavelengths of light, there's not much you can do at the macroscopic level that humans operate to control this effect. About all you can do is use a mount that has anti-Newton texturing on it (a very slight matte finish). However, it will blur the image, so I've found. I'd like to find a better way to flatten out buckled transparencies. I wonder if there's some sort of heat treatment... -- Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: Anthony Atkielski > > I use the glass 120 film holder on my LS-8000ED because I need to > be able to > hold the film flat, however, I have a lot of trouble with Newton > rings. The > weird thing, though, is that some images have multiple instances of the > rings, and others have none. This implies that the rings are not > inevitable > when scanning, only common ... so there must be a way to avoid them. What > causes the rings on some images but not on others, and what can I do to > avoid them when preparing and loading the film? Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Minolta Scan Dual III - new
I forgot to mention it now is 16 bit like the Elite, rather than 12 bit A/D. The sample image they show on the next page shows a miraculous improvement in shadow info. They sure didn't show their scans looking like the "before" version when they were selling the Minolta Scan Dual II. This also explains why I have been seeing the Scan Dual II in Liquidation for $268 US. Art Lucans, Gunars wrote: > I just came across a webpage for a new version of the Minolta Scan Dual III that I >don't believe I've seen mentioned here: > > http://www.dimage.minolta.com/dual3/index.html > > Gunars > > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: What can you advise?
In a message dated 9/26/2002 10:25:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Now Howard, I was trying to be discrete here ;-) >> You were discreet...just thought it was time to 'fess up. Hope your back is better. Howard Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Minolta Scan Dual III - new
If they changed more than the color of the case and the USB connection to USB 2.0 I just might demand a exchange/replacement. I knew nothing about this model, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Anyone else have any gossip to report? Looks nicer, at least ;-) Art Lucans, Gunars wrote: > I just came across a webpage for a new version of the Minolta Scan Dual III that I >don't believe I've seen mentioned here: > > http://www.dimage.minolta.com/dual3/index.html > > Gunars > > > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Monitor Profile with driver changes
It shouldn't be necessary. About the only thing to watch out for is that most video cards include software that runs from the system tray (assuming Windows here) that lets you tweak the color or gamma, and that really needs to be disabled or set to neutral. I suppose it's possible that installing an upgrade might re-enable something and override how your profiling software sets up the video card. -- Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco Paulmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Just wondering, when you update your video card drivers is it > necessary to reprofile your monitor or will the current PhotoCal > profile still function correctly? Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Minolta Scan Dual III - new
I just came across a webpage for a new version of the Minolta Scan Dual III that I don't believe I've seen mentioned here: http://www.dimage.minolta.com/dual3/index.html Gunars Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
