RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Thanks, Ed! I learned something about hardware from you today ;-) I wonder if Ed is a Mechanical Engineer or not? Maybe you shouldn't trust him? ;-) Art I don't care if Ed is a burger flipper at McDonald's, he know what he's talking about ;-)
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Dang, you've spotted I'm a hi-fi nutter. But I'm a flat-earther so all that nonsense with green pens and $3000 cables goes right past me. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 20 July 2001 02:56 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Paint the edges of the negatives green, and get some Shitake Stones or what ever they're called, sold at the high end stereo stores...some people swear they improve their sound, so they might improve scanning ;-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( I tried sitting on my scanner (I'm at least 80Kg) but it made no difference, the little begger still makes a rattling noise when it's doing a preview - a bit like a Skoda would do if it was miniaturised. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 19 July 2001 23:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Sorry, and I don't mean to be glib...but perhaps having an 85 pound scanner may be an asset ;-)
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Austin Franklin wrote: Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. I don't fully agree. One can design a very precise metal screw or other method for moving the CCD head assembly, in an enclosed unit internally which could be kept clean and lubricated. Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. Are you a mechanical engineer? Many of the true marvels produced by man were made by people considered uneducated or unskilled in the profession they achieved in. Gaudi had no formal training in architecture, yet he designed and built some of the most memorable architecture in Spain. Some people are just born with a native understanding that often far exceeds anything education can provide. Some kitchen inventors have come up with concepts with no training in the field they excel within. I wouldn't expect you to understand, however. My concern in the use of plastic carriers is the interfacing of the carrier and the stepper motor or other movement method. Gearing between plastic and plastic or metal and plastic is likely to produce wear over time, and result in imprecision. Regarding the SS4000, although it does not apparently need multi-scanning, due to the quality of the CCD which limits noise, I understand that multi-scanning is not as precise due to some aspect of the carrier or positioning design. Art
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of rafeb Sent: 20 July 2001 14:11 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( At 12:03 PM 7/20/01 +0100, Jawed wrote: Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I disagree, and I'm sure Austin will chime in here too g. All film scanners I've worked with move the film -- except for flatbeds with TPUs. The lamp and CCD stay put. This applies to: * Microtek 35t+ * Polaroid SprintScan Plus * Minolta Scan Speed * Nikon 8000 ED * LeafScan 45 All of the above scanners move the media. CCD and lamp are stationary. In fact, except for flatbeds posing as film scanners, I can't think of any film scanners that *don't* work that way. Well in general I am wrong. But the LS40 and the LS4000 both move the CCD/Light, not the film Jawed
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. No film scanner I know of uses teeth that mesh with a plastic carrier to move the film during scanning. Some have teeth that mesh with a plastic carrier used for rough positioning of the carrier to the start of the scan. Then a metal screw controlled by a stepper motor is used to move the film 36mm. Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Ed wrote: One prediction: a major scanner manufacturer is going to release several features like this in the next year that will drive several of their competitors out of the scanner business. The low-end scanner business is quite competitive - witness AGFA's recent abandonment of the low-end scanner market (the Acer scanners they've been reselling). Does this mean that I'm going to be stuck with *yet another* orphan? Geez, maybe I should go into the Classic Doorstop business! Best regards--LRA _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Not to worry - I have a Beta VCR and I'm still using it for its intended purpose. Maris - Original Message - From: Lynn Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 8:21 AM Subject: Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( | Ed wrote: | | One prediction: | a major scanner manufacturer is going to release several | features like this in the next year that will drive several of their | competitors out of the scanner business. | | The low-end scanner business is quite competitive - witness | AGFA's recent abandonment of the low-end scanner market | (the Acer scanners they've been reselling). | | Does this mean that I'm going to be stuck with *yet another* orphan? Geez, | maybe I should go into the Classic Doorstop business! | | Best regards--LRA | | _ | Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp | |
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Actually, Nikon LS2000 and LS30 and I suspect all the newer 35mm models, at least, move the scanning unit (CCD, lens and lighting source and any mirrors), and not the film. Yes, they move the film into frame position, but then the fine movement is done by moving the scanner head. This does probably allow for more accurate scans in multi-pass situations. Probably the best manner for multi passes, is when the scanner allows for each line to be multi-scanned without moving anything... scan, scan, scan, scan, move, scan, scan, scan, scan, move... you get the idea, building up all the multiple copies at the same time. Then they are all in identical registration. Art rafeb wrote: At 12:03 PM 7/20/01 +0100, Jawed wrote: Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I disagree, and I'm sure Austin will chime in here too g. All film scanners I've worked with move the film -- except for flatbeds with TPUs. The lamp and CCD stay put. This applies to: * Microtek 35t+ * Polaroid SprintScan Plus * Minolta Scan Speed * Nikon 8000 ED * LeafScan 45 All of the above scanners move the media. CCD and lamp are stationary. In fact, except for flatbeds posing as film scanners, I can't think of any film scanners that *don't* work that way. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Lynn Allen wrote: Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. I don't fully agree. One can design a very precise metal screw or other method for moving the CCD head assembly, in an enclosed unit internally which could be kept clean and lubricated. Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. In the case of the HP-S20, the film was moved via rubber tires, which would both wear and tend to slip over time, and not be very repeatable. Now, something that truly amazes me is that on several occasions I have run a print through my Epson printers several times to overprint to make color and exposure corrections. Tonight I sent a print through six times, as an experiment to see if I could build up density and make subtle color alterations. The darn thing is perfectly registered even after six run throughs. The only defect I see is from those pizza wheels which after six times, have made quite a series of sprocket holes into the print in a few locations. The print otherwise almost has a Ilfo/Cibachrome-like quality to it, after all those ink layers. Art
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Actually, Nikon LS2000 and LS30 and I suspect all the newer 35mm models, at least, move the scanning unit (CCD, lens and lighting source and any mirrors), and not the film. This does probably allow for more accurate scans in multi-pass situations. Why would that be?
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. I don't fully agree. One can design a very precise metal screw or other method for moving the CCD head assembly, in an enclosed unit internally which could be kept clean and lubricated. Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. Are you a mechanical engineer? Both mechanisms, if designed correctly, will maintain equal precision. Dust and dirt aren't going to effect the integrity of the precision movement unless there is one hell of a lot of it on there. What dust and dirt may do is increase friction in the mechanism. The only part of the mechanism for moving the film that is exposed is the carrier it self, and only if designed that way. It certainly is easy to clean. This mechanism will be dry, as opposed to greased, and will not accumulate debris like grease will. Also, the mechanism can easily be designed (as the unmentionable scanner is) such that the carrier is not part of the mechanics of the transport mechanism. There have been no complaints, that I am aware of, from SS4k users about debris buildup on the film carrier, nor about precision of the mechanism...and it is a 4k PPI scanner.
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
In a message dated 7/21/2001 5:14:06 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Actually, Nikon LS2000 and LS30 and I suspect all the newer 35mm models, at least, move the scanning unit (CCD, lens and lighting source and any mirrors), and not the film. Yes, every CoolScan Nikon scanner I've seen, including the newer ones, work this way (I haven't seen the LS-8000 yet though). This does probably allow for more accurate scans in multi-pass situations. I don't think there's anything intrinsicly more accurate about doing scans this way instead of the way the Polaroid SS4000 does it (moving the film carrier). However, the key differentiator appears to be the way the hardware/firmware in many scanners work. Some scanners (like the Nikon scanners) appear to find the zero position once upon startup, and keep track of the stepper motor position to do accurate repositioning. Flatbed scanners also use stepper motors, and in theory could reposition accurately. However, many scanners (including the SS4000 and most flatbeds) appear to use either a microswitch or an optical sensor to detect the zero position of the scanner. Using a microswitch or an optical sensor to detect the zero position is less accurate than the resolution of most scanners, which makes multi-pass multi-scanning impractical with these scanners. Probably the best manner for multi passes, is when the scanner allows for each line to be multi-scanned without moving anything The thing that totally amazes me is that scanner manufacturers like Acer (AGFA resells also) and Microtek (Polaroid resells also) haven't figured out that they can extend the product life of their scanners and make them more competitive by adding single-pass multi-scanning. I'll bet it wouldn't take more than a few hours to add this to the firmware of most scanner manufacturers. There are a few other simple things that can be added to the firmware of scanners without much work. One prediction: a major scanner manufacturer is going to release several features like this in the next year that will drive several of their competitors out of the scanner business. The low-end scanner business is quite competitive - witness AGFA's recent abandonment of the low-end scanner market (the Acer scanners they've been reselling). Regards, Ed Hamrick
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Polaroid scanners use the 'worm screw' design for the fine movement of the carrier. It is one of if not the most expensive components. It is then further calibrated by software in the manufacturing process so any anomalies can be adjusted for. David -Original Message- From: Arthur Entlich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 5:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Lynn Allen wrote: Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. I don't fully agree. One can design a very precise metal screw or other method for moving the CCD head assembly, in an enclosed unit internally which could be kept clean and lubricated. Moving the film via a carrier, which is likely molded plastic, with plastic gearing, and also having it need to mesh' with the motorized transport, and being that the carrier is prone to dust and dirt attraction and the elements, makes it much harder to maintain integrity of precision movement. In the case of the HP-S20, the film was moved via rubber tires, which would both wear and tend to slip over time, and not be very repeatable. Now, something that truly amazes me is that on several occasions I have run a print through my Epson printers several times to overprint to make color and exposure corrections. Tonight I sent a print through six times, as an experiment to see if I could build up density and make subtle color alterations. The darn thing is perfectly registered even after six run throughs. The only defect I see is from those pizza wheels which after six times, have made quite a series of sprocket holes into the print in a few locations. The print otherwise almost has a Ilfo/Cibachrome-like quality to it, after all those ink layers. Art
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Using a microswitch or an optical sensor to detect the zero position is less accurate than the resolution of most scanners, which makes multi-pass multi-scanning impractical with these scanners. I disagree. They don't have to re-home for each pass. Once home as ascertained, and then the starting place of the scan is known, the stepper can reposition it self back there ad-infinitum. There should be no positioning errors. The home switch is just to get a relative sense of where the mechanism is, it does not have to be accurate.
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
In a message dated 7/21/2001 12:29:30 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Using a microswitch or an optical sensor to detect the zero position is less accurate than the resolution of most scanners, which makes multi-pass multi-scanning impractical with these scanners. I disagree. They don't have to re-home for each pass. Once home as ascertained, and then the starting place of the scan is known, the stepper can reposition it self back there ad-infinitum. I agree that this would work fine (this appears to be how Nikon does it). My point was that many scanners do it wrong, probably because they aren't designed for multi-pass multi-scanning. This makes sense, because if a company were designing for multi-scanning, they'd do the simple firmware modifications needed to do single-pass multi-scanning. Regards, Ed Hamrick
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
= Original Message From Austin Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Also since the 8000 presumably has a heavier scanning head than the smaller scanners (more ccd etc), the mechanical constraints are more serious and it may therefore be the most sensitive to such things and which may not show up as problems on their 35mm scanners. This scanner moves the CCD and the light source, instead of the film? Is that so? That's certainly a place to look for trouble, since they both have to be on opposite sides of the film, and have to be synchronized... Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. The HP S20 seems to be the classic case. Obviously multi-scanning in the LS4000/8000 doesn't require multiple passes, but the LS40 does (Vuescan does multiple passes, Nikon Scan can't). I've noticed that the LS40's multi-pass scans, and my old Primefilm 1800's (el-cheapo scanner) multi-pass scans line up perfectly - so dare I say it, but it seems like an easy thing to manufacture these days. Unless the scanner is trying to resolve 4000ppi. Oops. Jawed
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
I don't know how heavy the ED 8000 is, but these days most electronics have minimal heft to them and aren't very solid. I have found that as a result, using a solid platform for devices like film scanners might help them to be less likely to create sympathetic vibration in the shelf or table they are on, which might just cause a feedback vibration situation. I have certainly found that film scanners when placed on hollow metal platforms resonate making the beast sound even more noisy then they tend to on their own, and I could literally feel the vibration they created while scanning. Art Wilson, Paul wrote: This is a possibility. As I mentioned, when I had the LS8000, it did not always band. Sometimes it would and sometimes it wouldn't. Nikon tech support did mention moving the scanner to a different location to rule out RF interference or other sources of noise. This was confirmed as a possibility by my father who's an electrical engineer/research scientist with a lot of experience designing analog circuits used in the same environments as digital stuff. Paul Wilson
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
At 12:03 PM 7/20/01 +0100, Jawed wrote: Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I disagree, and I'm sure Austin will chime in here too g. All film scanners I've worked with move the film -- except for flatbeds with TPUs. The lamp and CCD stay put. This applies to: * Microtek 35t+ * Polaroid SprintScan Plus * Minolta Scan Speed * Nikon 8000 ED * LeafScan 45 All of the above scanners move the media. CCD and lamp are stationary. In fact, except for flatbeds posing as film scanners, I can't think of any film scanners that *don't* work that way. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Also since the 8000 presumably has a heavier scanning head than the smaller scanners (more ccd etc), the mechanical constraints are more serious and it may therefore be the most sensitive to such things and which may not show up as problems on their 35mm scanners. This scanner moves the CCD and the light source, instead of the film? Is that so? That's certainly a place to look for trouble, since they both have to be on opposite sides of the film, and have to be synchronized... Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I don't believe either is less accurate at all, it's the complications of the two differing mechanisms that is at issue, both should be equally as accurate. I believe moving the film is going to be far less complicated. Also, if the CCD/light source moved, you would either have to position the film in the right position for scanning, or the film would have to be moved into position anyway.
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
I don't know how heavy the ED 8000 is, but these days most electronics have minimal heft to them and aren't very solid. Somewhat true, but power supplies can still be quite heavy. It is 19.8 lbs. Not really light, but certainly not all that heavy. Your suggestion of putting it on a solid surface is certainly a good one. Hell, strap it down!
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Not that I really want to comment on this at all, but I've found that if I don't, maybe nobody will (too often, and not often enough). :-) Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. A 35mm neg or slide is, geographically, an entirely different matter from an 8x10 reflective photo. Note, however, how much more expensive filmscanners are than flatbed scanners. The Industrial Age has been in place for numerous years--precision in either case is possible, yet expensive--and expensive in proportion to scale, perhaps. That, probably, is a Law of Physics. At least I'll think so until someone markets a 4000dpi flatbed for $100US. (and then, I'd be suspicious) :-) Best regards--LRA From: rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 09:10:57 -0400 At 12:03 PM 7/20/01 +0100, Jawed wrote: Dare I say it, but I suspect a scanner moving the film is less accurate than a scanner that moves the scan head. I disagree, and I'm sure Austin will chime in here too g. All film scanners I've worked with move the film -- except for flatbeds with TPUs. The lamp and CCD stay put. This applies to: * Microtek 35t+ * Polaroid SprintScan Plus * Minolta Scan Speed * Nikon 8000 ED * LeafScan 45 All of the above scanners move the media. CCD and lamp are stationary. In fact, except for flatbeds posing as film scanners, I can't think of any film scanners that *don't* work that way. rafe b. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one:-(
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Lynn Allen wrote: Not that I really want to comment on this at all, but I've found that if I don't, maybe nobody will (too often, and not often enough). :-) Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. True enough, Lynn, but our entire job in this listserv sometimes seems to be second-guessing the manufacturers and telling them what they did wrong. g Jawed had expressed an opinion on which of two schemes might work better. I simply wanted to point out that, for better or for worse, most film scanners worked the other way. My personal guess is that the better way is the one that moves the smaller mass -- all else being equal. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Rafe wrote: ...our entire job in this listserv sometimes seems to be second-guessing the manufacturers and telling them what they did wrong. g Seems to me they give us ample opportunity! ;-) My personal guess is that the better way is the one that moves the smaller mass -- all else being equal. That's Engineer Thinking and also a Law of Physics, which makes perfect sense. It may or may not hold true in all cases--Physics still holds some surprises, IMHO. :-) Best regards--LRA Original msg Given: That the stepper mechanism is accurate, and not just a piece of trash... Then: It would not matter whether the copy is moved or the scanning head is moved. True enough, Lynn, but our entire job in this listserv sometimes seems to be second-guessing the manufacturers and telling them what they did wrong. g Jawed had expressed an opinion on which of two schemes might work better. I simply wanted to point out that, for better or for worse, most film scanners worked the other way. My personal guess is that the better way is the one that moves the smaller mass -- all else being equal. rafe b. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Re the banding problem My first reaction was that the scan is being done off a native resolution 4000 dpi, 2000 dpi, 1333.333 dpi, 1000dpi etc and that software interpolation was/is being done. After a few of the other comments about possible mechanical problems I remember watching either my AT210 (flatbed) or an HP doing it's scan dance where it scans forward, pauses while the programed IO SCSI interface dumps the scan buffer, backs up past the backlash of the gears then scans forward for another chunk. A lot of the early scanners had poor SCSI performance. Does the scanner seem to stop and start or is it a smooth scan? An analogy is with many SCSI tapes that are streamers. As long as you keep them fed with data they will keep writing (or reading) if data stops the drive writes a stretch mark hoping to see more data soon, if no write data is provided the drive stops, when you write again the drive has to back up past the last data then read past the erased area where it starts the next block. The stops and starts waste tape and slow down the drive, we solved that back in the late 80's with the BSD dump routines and multiple write and read buffers and proceses. So is it possible that your scanner is out running your system, the scanner stops and has to back up. It could also be a similar problem that the data rate from the CCD head is higher than what the Scanner interface can handle and the microcode/firmware in the scanner is doing the back up and scan a swath dance. -- Stephen N. Kogge [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uimage.com
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Stephen Kogge wrote: So is it possible that your scanner is out running your system, the scanner stops and has to back up. It could also be a similar problem that the data rate from the CCD head is higher than what the Scanner interface can handle and the microcode/firmware in the scanner is doing the back up and scan a swath dance. Not a bad theory, Stephen, though I have 512 MB of RAM (700 MHz Athlon) and the problem is seen also on 35 mm scans, which involve much less data than medium-format scans. It is a very coarse-sounding scanner, as I have mentioned before. So I wouldn't rule out mechanical problems. Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. And unless I'm imagining this, there may also be a thermal component to this problem -- ie, it's more likely to occur on hot days, or after the scanner's been on a long time. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Stephen Kogge wrote: Re the banding problem My first reaction was that the scan is being done off a native resolution 4000 dpi, 2000 dpi, 1333.333 dpi, 1000dpi etc and that software interpolation was/is being done. After a few of the other comments about possible mechanical problems I remember watching either my AT210 (flatbed) or an HP doing it's scan dance where it scans forward, pauses while the programed IO SCSI interface dumps the scan buffer, backs up past the backlash of the gears then scans forward for another chunk. A lot of the early scanners had poor SCSI performance. Does the scanner seem to stop and start or is it a smooth scan? This is completely out of left field, but could it be a power supply (in the scanner) issue? Someone else commented on how this only seems to show up with scanners using stepper motors... Could the stepper motors cause spikes in the PSU that could interfere with the imaging side of things? Either sending noise to the CCD, or even pulsing the light source are a couple of possible ramifications... Just a wild guess... Isaac
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Title: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( This is a possibility. As I mentioned, when I had the LS8000, it did not always band. Sometimes it would and sometimes it wouldn't. Nikon tech support did mention moving the scanner to a different location to rule out RF interference or other sources of noise. This was confirmed as a possibility by my father who's an electrical engineer/research scientist with a lot of experience designing analog circuits used in the same environments as digital stuff. Paul Wilson -Original Message- From: Isaac Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Stephen Kogge wrote: Re the banding problem My first reaction was that the scan is being done off a native resolution 4000 dpi, 2000 dpi, 1333.333 dpi, 1000dpi etc and that software interpolation was/is being done. After a few of the other comments about possible mechanical problems I remember watching either my AT210 (flatbed) or an HP doing it's scan dance where it scans forward, pauses while the programed IO SCSI interface dumps the scan buffer, backs up past the backlash of the gears then scans forward for another chunk. A lot of the early scanners had poor SCSI performance. Does the scanner seem to stop and start or is it a smooth scan? This is completely out of left field, but could it be a power supply (in the scanner) issue? Someone else commented on how this only seems to show up with scanners using stepper motors... Could the stepper motors cause spikes in the PSU that could interfere with the imaging side of things? Either sending noise to the CCD, or even pulsing the light source are a couple of possible ramifications... Just a wild guess... Isaac
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Lawrence Smith wrote: Nikon tech support advised me to send the unit in for service this morning. They also said that they believed that service has been able 'fix' the banding issue. They could not tell me however what they believed the issue really was. They also said that they have only received a handful of calls about this problem. If any of you other 8000 owners that are having this issue have not called about it I would ask that you do so and be sure that you get escalated to the 2nd level guys. They need to know that this is a real problem and it's not just me and my TWO units. I am going to send it for repair to see if they can indeed fix it. Will let you know. I just got off the phone with Nikon Level 2 support (a fellow named Chris) and I will be sending my scanner in. I'll miss it, but this thing needs to be resolved. Chris claims that Nikon service has not recived a unit for service, yet, for the banding problem. That *may* possibly be true, if Lawrence's 1st 8000 went back to the retailer directly. I mentioned that I was in touch with several other folks with the same problem. Chris asked that others with this problem contact Nikon. Call 1-800-NIKON-UX. Talk to 1st Level support and explain the problem. I got a case number for 2nd-level support immediately. It took about 15 minutes of waiting (at 2 PM) to get to a real person at 1st Level. I think their policy at the moment is to neither confirm nor deny the problem. I led Chris to Lawrence's Banding web page while we were on the phone. I think it made an impression. The plot thickens. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Does the scanner seem to stop and start or is it a smooth scan? This is completely out of left field, but could it be a power supply (in the scanner) issue? Someone else commented on how this only seems to show up with scanners using stepper motors... Could the stepper motors cause spikes in the PSU that could interfere with the imaging side of things? Either sending noise to the CCD, or even pulsing the light source are a couple of possible ramifications... Just a wild guess... Isaac This is a good/interesting theory. The voltages coming out of the CCD are tiny. In high end CD players (multi-thousand dollars) ultra-quiet power supplies are a key component of the design. Jawed
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Chris claims that Nikon service has not recived a unit for service, yet, for the banding problem. That *may* possibly be true, if Lawrence's 1st 8000 went back to the retailer directly. These guys need to get their story straight. I believe it was Chris I was speaking with this morning and was told that he believed that service HAD been able to fix the banding issue. Can you say bullsh@t? So which is it? I guess we will see after Rafe and I send our units back... Lawrence
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
For those that don't get Dilbert in their local funny (?) papers, I think that Scott Adams has a web site. He could probably use some of this material in his strip. :-) Actually, I feel your pain--LRA From: Lawrence Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 15:49:02 -0400 Chris claims that Nikon service has not recived a unit for service, yet, for the banding problem. That *may* possibly be true, if Lawrence's 1st 8000 went back to the retailer directly. These guys need to get their story straight. I believe it was Chris I was speaking with this morning and was told that he believed that service HAD been able to fix the banding issue. Can you say bullsh@t? So which is it? I guess we will see after Rafe and I send our units back... Lawrence _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
This is completely out of left field, but could it be a power supply (in the scanner) issue? Someone else commented on how this only seems to show up with scanners using stepper motors... Could the stepper motors cause spikes in the PSU that could interfere with the imaging side of things? Either sending noise to the CCD, or even pulsing the light source are a couple of possible ramifications... Just a wild guess... Isaac Is there a scanner that doesn't use a stepper motor? I don't know, but I would assume that most (if not all) use steppers... Obviously, it would be a design flaw if the motors caused power supply problems to the digital and analog sections...
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Title: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( I no longer have my LS8000 as I've mentioned. However, Camera World did want my Nikon case # so they could return it. If anyone wants the case #, I'll supply it. Paul Wilson -Original Message- From: Raphael Bustin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Lawrence Smith wrote: Nikon tech support advised me to send the unit in for service this morning. They also said that they believed that service has been able 'fix' the banding issue. They could not tell me however what they believed the issue really was. They also said that they have only received a handful of calls about this problem. If any of you other 8000 owners that are having this issue have not called about it I would ask that you do so and be sure that you get escalated to the 2nd level guys. They need to know that this is a real problem and it's not just me and my TWO units. I am going to send it for repair to see if they can indeed fix it. Will let you know. I just got off the phone with Nikon Level 2 support (a fellow named Chris) and I will be sending my scanner in. I'll miss it, but this thing needs to be resolved. Chris claims that Nikon service has not recived a unit for service, yet, for the banding problem. That *may* possibly be true, if Lawrence's 1st 8000 went back to the retailer directly. I mentioned that I was in touch with several other folks with the same problem. Chris asked that others with this problem contact Nikon. Call 1-800-NIKON-UX. Talk to 1st Level support and explain the problem. I got a case number for 2nd-level support immediately. It took about 15 minutes of waiting (at 2 PM) to get to a real person at 1st Level. I think their policy at the moment is to neither confirm nor deny the problem. I led Chris to Lawrence's Banding web page while we were on the phone. I think it made an impression. The plot thickens. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Sorry, and I don't mean to be glib...but perhaps having an 85 pound scanner may be an asset ;-)
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
I tried sitting on my scanner (I'm at least 80Kg) but it made no difference, the little begger still makes a rattling noise when it's doing a preview - a bit like a Skoda would do if it was miniaturised. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 19 July 2001 23:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Sorry, and I don't mean to be glib...but perhaps having an 85 pound scanner may be an asset ;-)
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Paint the edges of the negatives green, and get some Shitake Stones or what ever they're called, sold at the high end stereo stores...some people swear they improve their sound, so they might improve scanning ;-) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jawed Ashraf Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( I tried sitting on my scanner (I'm at least 80Kg) but it made no difference, the little begger still makes a rattling noise when it's doing a preview - a bit like a Skoda would do if it was miniaturised. Jawed -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Austin Franklin Sent: 19 July 2001 23:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-( Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Sorry, and I don't mean to be glib...but perhaps having an 85 pound scanner may be an asset ;-)
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
At 01:43 20/07/01, rafe wrote: Stepper motors are known to resonate a certain step-rates, for example. Yes... Given that Nikon were reported to be having development problems with the higher res stepper motor for the new generation of product including the 8000, and given that jaggies is probably a result of some stepper motor resonance, and given that the reported banding seems to be related to nothing predictable but is changeable, then it could easily in fact be related to processing timing and thus step times, so it seems likely that the banding problem may also be related to stepper motor issues. Also since the 8000 presumably has a heavier scanning head than the smaller scanners (more ccd etc), the mechanical constraints are more serious and it may therefore be the most sensitive to such things and which may not show up as problems on their 35mm scanners. Julian Julian Robinson in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Also since the 8000 presumably has a heavier scanning head than the smaller scanners (more ccd etc), the mechanical constraints are more serious and it may therefore be the most sensitive to such things and which may not show up as problems on their 35mm scanners. This scanner moves the CCD and the light source, instead of the film? Is that so? That's certainly a place to look for trouble, since they both have to be on opposite sides of the film, and have to be synchronized...
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Hi! My replacement 8000 was humming right along and I thought I was home free but I scanned a slide with lots of deep blue/purple sky and sure enough, banding galore. I have a tag to send it back to Nikon but I'm a bit skeptical that it will make much difference at this point. If my wife were Could You publish any image on your site with visible banding? I'm very curious how it looks like. -- Marcin M. Nagraba e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Znudzilo Ci sie logo w komorce? Wgraj nowe [ http://komorki.onet.pl/dodatki.html ]
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
I can and will! Lawrence Could You publish any image on your site with visible banding? I'm very curious how it looks like. -- Marcin M. Nagraba e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Znudzilo Ci sie logo w komorce? Wgraj nowe [ http://komorki.onet.pl/dodatki.html ]
Re: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 08:53:03 -0400 Lawrence Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: My replacement 8000 was humming right along and I thought I was home free but I scanned a slide with lots of deep blue/purple sky and sure enough, banding galore. Do you think this is just showing banding which is happening generally but hard to see, or is it just in this area? Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
Tony, I think it is happening everywhere but is most obvious in the blue regions. Lawrence Do you think this is just showing banding which is happening generally but hard to see, or is it just in this area? Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
