I just tried a couple scans and Insight 5 is a winner.
The ability to save 12 bit corrected files on the SS4000
is great.
I'm very pleased with the Kodak Supra 400 film
terms, as good as, or better, than what I get
with Vuescan.
kudos to Polaroid to these improvements.
-JimD
At 03:09 PM
I would love to see a more hybrid kind of management approach, where a
mix of N.A. or European customer service and consumer awareness was
mixed with the usually superior manufacturing and quality control of
goods produced in places like Japan.
Art
I just realized, to a great extent,
rafeb wrote:
At 12:52 AM 7/20/01 -0700, Art wrote:
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.
Hi Art. Your sources might have told you that
it's 19.8 lbs, which information is freely available
on the
I believe catalog use (for sales) is usually considered fair use, and
protected from copyright infringement. You might wish to place a
watermark through the image, so the digital file is not reproducible in
any realistic manner.
Art
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
Technically no; but you can probably
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
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
At 09:54 PM 7/20/01 -0600, Frank Nichols wrote:
Try going to the Device Manager and removing the device. Then reboot and
hopefully the Wizard will show it face asking to install the new hardware,
then show it the path to the new drivers.
Thanks, Frank. That was exactly it.
rafe b.
At 02:43 AM 7/21/01 -0700, Art wrote:
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
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?
S. Matthew Prastein wrote:
No, I do not scan 16 times, only 3, but at
highest resolution.
That would be the high 32 in Mira, or 48-bit in Vuescan. I'm not sure this
buys you much with thin negs, but OTOH every little bit helps (pun not
intended). :-)
I _think_ I see improvement in noise
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
Good idea,
Thanks,
/fn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 3:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: OT: Copyright on Photo's
I believe catalog use (for sales) is usually
Clearly the film has to be in SOME kind of carrier,
whatever the scanner brand. Austin's Leaf uses
aluminum carriers (Beseler) but all the scanners
I've owned have plastic-molded film holders of
varying complexity. Frankly, I feel a bit more
comfortable with my negatives up against
Frank wrote:
I purchased a set of 4 Landscape Prints at an auction a couple days ago. It
is my intention to sell them on eBay, however, they are un-signed so I am
not to optimistic.
My question is: Can I scan them, and display a small picture of them on
eBay for advertising without violating
Thanks, Rafe. I could have used that bit of insight about a week ago, when
the same thing happened to me (it all worked out happily--or mostly, except
that I crashed my video card and had to reinstall *that*, too). Now I have
your msg in a safe place--providing I don't crash my HD.
Best
i need to buy a new scanner as i still have LS-1000 and have trouble scanning
contrasty and underexposed slides. can i get by with LS-40 as i don't make
big prints or do i need to buy LS-4000.what is the difference? thanks, joanna
I note there's been some discussion of copyright lately. I just uploaded a
stack of new pictures to my website, and it's taken quite a while to process
them all. On the larger images I've put (c) Rob Geraghty 2001 where the
(c) is the proper copyright symbol. I've also marked each picture
Joanna wrote:
contrasty and underexposed slides. can i get by with LS-40 as i don't make
big prints or do i need to buy LS-4000.what is the difference?
The main differences are (AFAIK):
1) LS40 is 2900ppi and the LS4000 is 4000ppi
2) The LS4000 can do single pass multiscanning while the LS40
In a message dated 7/21/2001 9:14:18 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have finally managed to catch VS red-handed WRT it's occasional excess
highlight blue in Superia 400 scans. I had thought this was an anomalous
behaviour to do with the films 4th layer response under some shooting
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,
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
I've just joined this maillist because I want to go
electronic with my slides and negatives. Currently I'm
trying to decide which scanner to buy. I was ready to
purchase the LS4000 when I stumbled across a review of
the new Canon which on paper seems to have almost the
same specs, but only costs
and how much more money it would cost..
count me among the vuescan satisfied users group.. I'm not much for snazzy
user
interfaces, I want results and quick!..what other program can you get updates
every week or so?.. it just keeps getting better.
I can say from experience that writing code
In a message dated 7/20/2001 2:58:04 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have an Acer Scanwit 2740S, which
requires multiple passes to do a multiple scan. I thought that this
was the right thing to do to get lower noise when scanning at 16x. so
as to be able to average the input from
At 12:07 AM 7/22/2001 +1000, Rob Geraghty wrote:
I note there's been some discussion of copyright lately. I just uploaded a
stack of new pictures to my website, and it's taken quite a while to process
them all. On the larger images I've put (c) Rob Geraghty 2001 where the
(c) is the proper
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
Actually Lynn, if you look at my response, you will find that we are for all
intents and purposes in agreement on this. :-)
Laurie
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lynn Allen
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 8:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm told by those who have that virtually all infringers will
gladly pay your triple licensing fee in accordance with ASMP and EP
practice rather than chance a suit over a registered image.
This statement is slightly over-optimistic and a little lacking in
qualifications.
First, it probably is
I believe catalog use (for sales) is usually considered fair use, and
protected from copyright infringement.
I don't think so Art. The qualifier here is the fact that the owner of the
prints being sold happens to be the one advertising them via use of the
image or is authorizing an agent to
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.
Ed:
Have you yet gotten one of the new Canon 4000 ppi scanners to
include in VueScan? In one of your earlier posts, you questioned
whether the unit uses 2 scans or one to do the IR dust removal; have
you gotten any information on this? Also, is the Canon cable of
single pass
Forwarding per Roberts request.
David
-Original Message-
From: Robert DeCandido, PhD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 3:11 PM
To: Hemingway, David J
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Help with SS 4000, please
Hello David,
As per your
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
So far the PCI 5.x looks like a definite improvement over 4.51. Although I
like Vuescan and will still use it, I think I will use PCI more often than I
did in the past.
Some initial observations(SS4K, Win2k, Pentium III 667, 1GB ram):
1. The main improvement is the ability to scan and correct
Someone has made a claim that he can get 15 stops of latitude out of BW
negative film. Specifically TMax 100. Here's my understanding:
Since stops are either 1/2 the amount of light, or 2x the amount of light,
15 stops would be 2**15, or 32768:1, which is a dynamic range of 4.5. My
experience
Further to my original message, I have found that white and black point
settings can only be made in the histogram when using the monitor profile
instead of Adobe RGB. When I use the monitor profile(colorcal), the curves
feature becomes useable and the black and white point can be set either on
Thanks for that, Ed. I figured I must be the only one who thought that was
the case..
To be honest I've never used it to help with overexposed negs/ undexposed
slides because my Acer has no trouble with these - from conversations with
other Acer users, I suspect either my lamp is
It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
not arguing in opposition to registering the copyright on one's images.
I have never experienced infringement myself. I am getting my information
second hand from the EP and StockPhoto lists.
I should have mentioned that
Does the lamp auto-shut off feature work on your SS4000?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of JimD
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: PolaColor Insight 5.x
I just
Stan McQueen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
not arguing in opposition to registering the copyright on one's images.
What protection does registration with the *US* Copyright office offer if
the person who infringes your
Rob, the copyright symbol in your notice should be followed immediately by
the year, not your name.
Stan, since when does the copyright office accept CDs for the required
deposit? I was specifically told when I called them (US Copyright Office)
about six months ago that they wouldn't accept
41 matches
Mail list logo
