I use a Minolta Dimage 5400 II running under X64 (precursor to Vista).
It is USB interfaced, so SCSI isn't exactly an issue. However,
technically ASPI is still required. This is a problem with X64 (probably
Vista, but I have no first hand knowledge of this). With a bit of
googling, I found a
I've had a Nikon Coolscan V for ~3+ years now. I live in an apartment,
and it
lives in the living room (activity, dust, etc.).
I used it heavily for years, and then hardly at all in the last year
(illness). So I
scanned a roll recently and it, well, looks kinda crappy.
So my questions: is it
As a note, at this point in time, there are little by way of drivers for
scanners (or printers, for that matter) on the market for Vista X64 OSs -
or for that matter XP X64 OSs. As for ASPI Layers, Microsoft also is
displaying little interest in supporting them in the future - especially for
X64
I stripped mine down recently following
http://www.vad1.com/photo/dirty-scanner/ls2000-cleaning/ the mirrors and
lenses were thick with dust.
David
- Original Message -
From: Scott McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 4:21 PM
Subject:
No I installed vista ultimate 32bit not 64bit.
Even my old flatbed Epson perfection 1200 installs from the disc, twain
works perfectly in Photoshop.
In device manager the SCSI controller has the exclamation mark showing and
no amount of trying to install any Adaptec driver ( as for XP ) will work.
remove and replace the SCSI terminator block. If the scanner is
chained
with other SCSI devices, remake the connections at all of them.
Trying a
different terminator will also be worthwhile.
Tony-
Thanks for your advice. I have some questions about the SCSI
terminator block. My SS4000 has two
On 10/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Next to this second port is a switch marked
SCSI termination on/off. Am I correct in my assumption that so
long as this switch is turned on, the scanner is internally
terminated and no terminator block is needed?
Yes, sorry, I had forgotten about that.
I tried to unsubscribe and subscribe again from a different address, but
both attempts failed with the following:
Could you help please.
Thank you.
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at smtp.lightspeed.ca.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a
R. Jackson wrote:
It depends, really. Like, I was scanning some old Ektachrome 400
today. The images were coming out at at 4374 x 6400 pixels. That's
about 28 megapixels and the scanner still wasn't clearly capturing
the grain structure. Looking at it closely you can see what looks
like
On 08/06/2007 George Harrison wrote:
Thanks for the link below but I am damned if I can see any images at
all !
George Harrison
If you need convincing, download and print at 16x12 some of the
sample
full res images at http://www.steves-digicams.com/cameras_digpro.html
Select the camera
On 09/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm. Interesting and quite contrary to my own experience and others.
6 mp DSLR's could not hold a candle to a properly scanned piece of
35mm
film in terms of image quality, detail, resolution and
enlarge-ability.
:-) I said it was contentious.
In
On 09/06/2007 James L. Sims wrote:
I think that digital imaging definitely has a place in this list,
Tony.
I have confidence in and great respect for the core group of this
list.
Digital imaging, film scanning and digicams are still evolving. Just
some of the issues are RAW file converters,
On 09/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
couldn't figure out how to pop the top off to look for
dust because there were no screws
The rectangular slots in the base provide access to plastic clips which
retain the cover - by the look of it, I haven't tried. They're a fairly
standard form of
On 09/06/2007 R. Jackson wrote:
to fully resolve the grain
structure of film takes WAY more resolution than you need to replace
it as a capture medium.
Yup. At one time I had 4,000 8,000 and 12,000ppi scans of the same bit of
film. 8,000 was clearly better than 4,000 (not hugely, but clearly),
I'm pleased to see the list has come to life again.
I wonder if anyone has been able to get a Nikon LS30 working with NK scan
and Vista.
There are no drivers for the SCSI card.
Has any one found a workaround ?
I've got around it by keeping XP as dual boot, but it would be nice to to
have to.
Contentious is an understatement! I don't think we are is disagreement,
and as I suggested it is all about what precisely you are talking about.
At the 6mp level, I think people were willing to sacrifice image quality
for convenience and speed. You've outlined some of that below. And it's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How I wish they could just fit the sensor chip from the Canon 5D (or even
the 1Ds MkII) into the Contax N Digital -- now that would produce be
one h*ll of a camera.
I fully agree and I wish for a long time that Contax makes DSLRs also in the
semi-prof segment.
I still
-Included Message--
Date: 9-Jun-2007 01:06:25 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: film and scanning vs digital photography
(I think the
objective consensus would settle on a 10mp equivalence with
On 09/06/2007 Henk de Jong wrote:
The Canon 5D looks like an interesting camera body and even more now
I have
read that I could (re)use my Contax, Yashica and Tokina lenses.
A friend fitted Leica R lenses to his 1DS-2.
http://www.cameraquest.com/frames/4saleReos.htm
--
Regards
Tony Sleep
On 6/8/07, James L. Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with you, Tony, Digital cameras, for all practical purposes, has
surpassed the quality of 35mm format film and I believe that happened
with the arrival of the six megapixel camera, a few years ago,
significant cropping, not withstanding
On 09/06/2007 David wrote:
I wonder if anyone has been able to get a Nikon LS30 working with NK
scan
and Vista.
There are no drivers for the SCSI card.
Has any one found a workaround ?
You won't find any support by Nikon, but I believe Vuescan will happily do
it. Trial version from
On 09/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This conflicts with
claims that it is beneficial to scan at 4000 dpi or higher
resolutions. Am I likely seeing the limitations of the optics of
my scanner rather than of the information capacity of the film?
Anybody know how well the optics of the
Yes, Astia 100F is very good. In fact, a lot of the current 100 speed
color slide films are very good and competitive. Velvia 100F is also
very good and very fine grained. I use it in 120 size and scanned at
4000dpi on the Nikon 8000, grain is almost invisible. Kodak, meanwhile,
has not been
Actually I don't think your recollection is entirely accurate. If it
was the 1Ds (Mk1), then it is only an 11mp camera. And when you say as
good as, you really do need to explain what exactly you mean. The 11mp
1Ds (Mk1) is overall, probably a touch better than a piece of 100 ISO
color 35mm
16mp 1Ds MkII is the one I recall the camera LL said matched film. I haven't
bought into the 22mPixel rumor. I was told by someone who attended the photo
show in Vegas that it was announced. Beyond that, I have no knowledge of the
camera. I'd be plenty happy with the Mk II. I attended a show
Going back to Paul's original post... and writing as an SS4000 D200 owner
who just unloaded his most modern film gear, I'd say macro landscape are
good territory for the D200. If you prefer the wide range lower contrast
of negative film then there's some adapting. I'd put RAW files about
Thanks for the link below but I am damned if I can see any images at all !
George Harrison
If you need convincing, download and print at 16x12 some of the sample
full res images at http://www.steves-digicams.com/cameras_digpro.html
--
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://tonysleep.co.uk
Tony,
I, for one am delighted to see the response to this question. While
this list was created for those with advanced interest in film scanning,
a group has assembled within it that is keenly interested in photo
imaging - be it a scanned image or a digital image. Once scanned the
image is
Click on the Camera name to get to the review of that camera. In the
review, there is a page with full resolution sample images.
George Harrison wrote:
Thanks for the link below but I am damned if I can see any images at all !
George Harrison
If you need convincing, download and print at
Hmmm. Interesting and quite contrary to my own experience and others.
6 mp DSLR's could not hold a candle to a properly scanned piece of 35mm
film in terms of image quality, detail, resolution and enlarge-ability.
Scanned 35mm film had unambiguously better image quality. Convenience
and speed
I tried cleaning my Polaroid SprintScan 4000 with the included
brush, but couldn't figure out how to pop the top off to look for
dust because there were no screws. I also re-installed the driver.
It booted 3 times in a row, but only if turned on during rather
than before booting the computer. On
On Jun 8, 2007, at 8:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm. Interesting and quite contrary to my own experience and others.
It depends, really. Like, I was scanning some old Ektachrome 400
today. The images were coming out at at 4374 x 6400 pixels. That's
about 28 megapixels
I have been having a problem with my Polaroid SprintScan 4000
scanner. Polaroid technical support hasn't been very helpful, so
I'm wondering if someone out there might have experienced this
problem and know something about the cause/solution. When I turn
my scanner on, the green and yellow LED
On 07/06/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been having a problem with my Polaroid SprintScan 4000
scanner. Polaroid technical support hasn't been very helpful, so
I'm wondering if someone out there might have experienced this
problem and know something about the cause/solution. When I
I'm not familiar with that scanner. However, it may pay to install the
latest ASPI for your OS (assuming you have a PC). Check both adaptec and
Microsoft websites, and use the latest software.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been having a problem with my Polaroid SprintScan 4000
scanner.
snip
On 6/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been having a problem with my Polaroid SprintScan 4000
scanner. Polaroid technical support hasn't been very helpful, so
I'm wondering if someone out there might have experienced this
problem and know something about the
Thanks for the suggestions about my Polaroid SprintScan. I got
home too late tonight to try them, but will soon. This list is
much more helpful than Polaroid tech support. I also have some
questions on another matter. I'm considering buying a Nikon D200
digital camera, and I'd like some
Now that I have a larger crop to get a better look at the problem,
(sorry, I'm not downloading the 100+ meg versions) rather than working
from a word description, I tend to agree with Tony. It looks like it
may be a dirty optical path. Film scanners are apt to pick up residue
from cigarette
Could you crop a piece of the image where you see the problem? That is,
a full resolution scan, but a small piece where the problem occurs.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions on the following issue:
I just did a scan of a Fuji Astia 6x7 slide It is about
Sure.
Here is a 100% crop from the upper left hand corner of the window. I
adjusted the levels to make the problem more apparent
boncratious.info/CherryBlossomDining-crop.jpg
And for adventurous few who want to see more, here is a much larger crop
preserved in the tiff format and unadjusted,
That all sounds like a reasonable explanation. Thanks.
Yes, the reason using the glass carrier is because the regular one sucks
(really, Nikon should be embarrassed, and then smacked in the head for
continuing to supply the flawed item with the LS-9000 and making you pay
$250+ extra to get a
On 27/05/2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. It almost looks like a faint light leak
into the dark areas -- a slight fogging of the some of the dark areas.
Probably flare, which although it could be just an inherent lens defect is
often dust or contamination on the optics of the scanner indicating
Let's call this effect a halo. The halo appears more evident on the
right of a dark object, than the left. Now this could be my monitor.
However, there is one spot that is odd. Look at the man at the left in
the image. There is a sliver of light right next to his neck. There
doesn't seem to be a
Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions on the following issue:
I just did a scan of a Fuji Astia 6x7 slide It is about 2/3'rds dark,
shadow and silhouette, one thirds correctly exposed, bright image
through a window (of sorts). The scan was with the Nikon LS-8000 with
the glass film
I looked at the image you provided, but the jpeg artifacting makes it
difficult to analyze what you are speaking of exactly.
However, there are some knowns regarding scanning.
1) Blooming: high contrast areas with high brightness push the CCD
sensor limits in terms of the amount of electrons
I have this scanner. You can't put the carrier in until the software is
started. It has some sort of initialization routine.
Laurie wrote:
I do not know for sure; but I assume that the OS is already recognizing the
hardware and that the software/driver is installed, loaded and open. Thus,
the
The list should now be operating normally again.
Regards
Tony Sleep
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the
Tony Sleep wrote:
The list should now be operating normally again.
Thanks Tony, let's see if this reply shows up on the list.
Peter Marquis-Kyle
Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with
It did, so I guess all is well with the world. :-)
Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter
Marquis-Kyle
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 6:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: ADMIN: LIST BACK
Tony Sleep wrote:
The list
Slide film can be tricky to scan. I'm not sure I'd like to let it fly on
auto, which I assume is the only reason for having a slide feeder.
I haven't been following Nikon scanners, but in the past, they have had
depth of field issues, i.e. difficulty with curved film.
You have a different goal
This particular Gigabyte has 8 sata ports with two FRAIDs. I figure once
the horsepower of the machine is not enough, it will be at the very
least a good server. I lost count of the USB portsl but I believe it has
12. Also two 1394B (yes, the 800mbps) firewire. Also two lans. Dual
bios, so you can
On 05/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
I am not impressed with ASUS web support. After all the great reviews
about ASUS, that was a letdown.
IME Asus are one of the better mfr's, with generally solid boards and a
decent record of fixing things that don't quite work. I have used them a
lot - 3 here
I've built three machines using the GA K8N Ultra-9 board, one for myself, 2
for others. So far it's about the most stable board I've ever used, runs
all AMD 64 single and dual core processors up to the FX60 and is happy with
nearly anything you throw at it.
The other two users are equally
Not trying to start an argument here (this post is getting too long
already, plus it's really gone off subject), but I still stand by what I
said -- self-powered devices will typically run from a non-powered USB port.
Case in point: My current machine has 4 USB-2 ports on the backplane, into
Sorry I have been out of this loop for a while. On taking advice to
update the BIOS and chipset drivers, I checked the Asus site for
updates. There is an auto update for the BIOS and a list of chipset
drivers on their website. Asus may make a great motherboard but their
web support leaves much
On 04/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
But just as the restart was completing, I encountered the
much feared blue screen. I wont bore anyone with the details but I
finally was up and running some seven hours later, with the updated
drivers.
Oh I hate weekends like that :-}
Too often, by half.
Tony Sleep wrote:
On 04/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
But just as the restart was completing, I encountered the
much feared blue screen. I wont bore anyone with the details but I
finally was up and running some seven hours later, with the updated
drivers.
Oh I hate weekends like that :-}
Charles,
After I went through a miserable seven hours fighting a blue screen
error on startup after the first attempt at installing new chipset
drivers, I finally managed to get the new drivers installed and the
reader seems to be functioning properly.
I have responded to your questions below.
FWIW, I don't build PCs using Asus mobos. I find I get a better bang for
you buck with Gigabyte. I've built two systems using the GA-k8n Ultra-9
(x64 and Suse 10.0)
If you are using onboard raid (often known as FRAID for fake raid), it
won't be blazing. I use the onboard raid myself as I really
I guess I should say Asus mobos anymore. It used to be my mobo of choice.
http://www.iometer.org/
To some degree you can measure disk i/o with the program, though it
really flogs your whole system.
gary wrote:
FWIW, I don't build PCs using Asus mobos. I find I get a better bang for
you buck
My previous machine had a Gigabyte MB and I really liked it. So far,
I'm not impressed. It's also my first experience with Nvidia chipset
drivers - I was ready for anything else, given my experience with VIA.
I may go back to Gigabyte, sooner than later.
Jim
gary wrote:
I guess I should say
On 02/06/2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, the technique works for the KM Scan Elite 5400 II, but doesn't
work
for the Nikon LS-8000. Maybe Ed could find a fix for that.
Ed's reply:-
On 03/06/2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a more complete scanners.inf file. I thought the extra
On 02/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
I have a 32-bit device on a
computer running Windows XP 32-bit that regularly fails to see one
device unless it's activated and the computer restarted - much like
the
behavior that I experienced with Win 2K.
That's normal and correct behaviour for SCSI. You
Thanks for this. I downloaded the expanded scanners.inf file and used
it to load the Nikon LS-8000. I read scanners.inf file in Notepad and
saw the LS-8000 listed so it looked promising.
The scanner, again, loads fine. But even with the Nikon LS-8000 loaded
using this new file, Vuescan still
On 03/06/2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But even with the Nikon LS-8000
loaded
using this new file, Vuescan still crashes the system immediately upon
starting. I wish the blue screen of death didn't pass so quickly so I
could read what the issue was. Loading the KM 5400 II and my Epson
http://www.sysinternals.com/utilities/bluescreen.html
I have no first had knowledge of this program, but I can vouch for
sysinternals.com in general. See if it capture your BSOD.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for this. I downloaded the expanded scanners.inf file and used
it to load the
These are USB devices, Tony. I was told by a so-called computer guru
that this problem was corrected in XP. It could be that the device is
incorrectly installed - it's a USB 2 device but its speed, or slowness,
indicated that Win XP thinks it an early USB device. I've tried
uninstalling the USB
On 03/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
These are USB devices, Tony.
Ah, OK. That is weird, then. I've used USB USB2 a lot and not had any
problems like that. Is the controller on the motherboard? If so, it might
be worth looking for updated motherboard drivers, or trying a PCI card USB
adaptor
If you have connected the devices to an unpowered hub, this can create
problems - especially if you have several devices that have power
requirements connected to the same hub directly or daisy chained to it.
Furthermore, despite the claims, two many devices and/or hubs daisy
chained of the same
On 03/06/2006 Tony Sleep wrote:
Is the controller on the motherboard? If so, it might
be worth looking for updated motherboard drivers, or trying a PCI
card USB
adaptor instead.
Sorry, too much hurry. I could have been clearer. I meant 'updated BIOS
and chipset drivers' for the mobo. Back to
On 03/06/2006 Laurie Solomon wrote:
If you have connected the devices to an unpowered hub
Oh yes, what Laurie says, in spades. I sometimes forget there are such
things as unpowered hubs. They're more or less completely useless. A
single USB port is specced at 0.5amps, and a large proportion of
That's and Idea. Thanks! I usually check for updates but I haven't
checked the Asus website for the new board.
Jim
Tony Sleep wrote:
On 03/06/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
These are USB devices, Tony.
Ah, OK. That is weird, then. I've used USB USB2 a lot and not had any
problems like that.
I have three devices plus a seven-and-one card reader, all connected to
onboard USB ports. My trackball, an Epson 1640 scanner and R2400
printer work fine but the card reader fails to se the Compact Flash card
when it's inserted and a reboot is required - much like my older
machine, running win
Hi!
If you can't read the BSOD error message, you need to set your machine NOT
to reboot after crashing. Control
Panel-System-Advanced-Startup/Recovery-Settings. UNCHECK Automatically
Restart and hit OK a lot.
Les
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version:
My 2c cents here: USB printers, scanners and other peripherals that plug
into the wall or are battery-powered typically don't draw power from the
USB port so are not affected by the 500mA limit.
The 7-in-1 card reader may be marginal in its power requirement, and some
motherboards are less
My 2c cents here: USB printers, scanners and other
peripherals that plug into the wall or are battery-powered
typically don't draw power from the USB port so are not affected by
the 500mA limit.
Unfortunately, this is not true. The power that is drawn from the USB
connection has nothing to
You are able to use your 5400 II on x64? I have Vuescan running on x64
but can't load/install the scanner on the system. How did you use Ed's
.inf file to install the scanner? This is great if you were able to
do this. Thanks!
gary wrote:
I got a call back from Konica Minolta regarding the
What OS are you using?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried this and it doesn't work. I right-clicked the scanner.inf file
and installed it. Vuescan and the OS still can't see or use the scanner
(that goes for both the KM Scan Elite 5400 II and the Nikon LS-8000).
I've tried it a few different
Windows XP 64 should see it, however, I have a 32-bit device on a
computer running Windows XP 32-bit that regularly fails to see one
device unless it's activated and the computer restarted - much like the
behavior that I experienced with Win 2K.
Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Windows XP
It worked! I'll be d*mned! ;-)
To have the 5400 II functional under x64 is great. Thanks for the tip.
By the way, I also tried it with the Nikon LS-8000. Windows x64 takes
the scanners.inf file to load the scanner, but as soon as you start up
Vuescan the whole system immediately crashes (the
I expect that the peripheral companies have looked this situation over
and determined they save (or make) more money than they lose by doing it
the way they do. Truth is, as the peripheral markets consolidate more
and more, our choices become limited and eventually we often return to
the same
Laurie,
Which one of us should take this issue up with the powers that be at
MS? After all, this seems to be exactly the kind of issue we are
supposed to be empowered to get an answer about, yes? ;-)
Email me.
Art
Laurie Solomon wrote:
Tony, the question, for which I do not know the answer,
You could suggest degrees of certification. E.g., bronze would be
bog-standard technical compliance. Platinum would be granted for
commitment to cover support across a number of platforms, OS, for a
certain number of years, open publication of APIs, high security, a
process to handle customers
On 31/05/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
I downloaded a profile from Ian Lyons' Computer Darkroom website
( http://www.computer-darkroom.com/home.htm )several years ago that
seems to work much better than the OEM profile.
I tried that. It helped a bit, provided you did a profile-to-profile
Without the driver, Vuescan won't know that the scanner is there because
the computer OS won't know the scanner is there -- or it might know
something is there, but won't know what exactly it is or how to deal or
communicate with it.
Tony Sleep wrote:
different driver architecture? AFAIK
If you use Windows the other Infrared dedicated film scanner is Plustek
OpticFilm 7200i. £250 or US$450. Its 7200dpi so could give larger prints
than Sprintscan 4000dpi. Reviews:
http://www.datamind.co.uk/Merchant/plustek_opticfilm_uk_press.htm
Holds up to 4 slides at a time.
Chris Street
Just a note. Vuescan doesn't work well with the Dimage 5400 II. IIRC, it
looked banded. Fortunately, the KM software is excellent.
Now perhaps if the internal commands were put in the public domain, Ed
H. could do a good job with it.
Tony Sleep wrote:
On 31/05/2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tony,
Thanks for looking into the 64-bit capability of vuescan. It was nice
to hear from Ed once again on this list. This discussion has brought
about a kind of old home week, hasn't it, and it's been nice to hear
from a few others, as well.
By the way, Tony, please check your clock, this
On 31/05/2006 James L. Sims wrote:
By the way, Tony, please check your clock, this message was time
stamped
3/31/06 1:05 PM.
Yes, sorry about that. I had been using some accounts s/w for which I
needed to fake the time date, and forgot to set it back.
Tony Sleep
Thanks, congratulations, and good luck, Tony.
We need your list, and it's good you saved it.
I'm looking forward to seeing it on the other side.
--
Sam
On May 31, 2006, at 7:56 AM, Tony Sleep wrote:
[snip]
http://konicaminolta.com/releases/2006/0119_03_01.html
It is not clear if they have abandoned the scanner business from reading
this press release.
I see a real problem here in that Windows will be going to Vista in a
year and there will be no drivers for Minolta scanners.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It may not be clear, but they are certainly no longer making or selling
scanners. The Dimage Scan Elite 5400 II are now exceptionally rare and
if you can get one for a very good price, buy it. Also I am looking
for one, so if you could tell me where you found some, I would much
appreciate it.
Before giving up on your Polaroid 4000 scanner, take a look at this dust
and scratch removal utility Polaroid offers for your scanner.
It isn't IR, but it does a pretty good job. Further there is an
improved version based upon the same basic concept called Dustbuster
which was made privately and
A couple of points need to be made.
First, there are differences between native drivers for 64 bit operating
systems and 32 bit operating systems. If you are running X64, then it is
probably downgrading or reverting to 32 bit in order to use the 32 bit
scanner drivers (I do not think that Minolta
To be completely clear, the Minolta drivers do not work on X64. I need
to boot do XP. Thus I am stuck with a dual boot system.
Microsoft has supplied a shockingly complete set of 64 bit drivers for
old hardware, right on the X64 media (I guess it's a DVD, but I don't
recall). However, this takes
Yes, KonicaMinolta scanner drivers and Nikon scanner drivers do not
work on XP Pro x64.
I don't think I would ever say this about a MS product but x64 is really
good. It seems to me to be a big step forward from the regular XP Pro.
PS and just about everything runs faster. It is a shame that
Microsoft has supplied a shockingly complete set of 64 bit drivers for
old hardware, right on the X64 media (I guess it's a DVD, but I don't
recall). However, this takes cooperation (I assume) from the manufacturer.
In point of fact, the software packaged inbox with the Microsoft operating
But how will they know what demand for these drivers is? Will they poll
their registered users? Or just count the complaints until they get enough?
Laurie wrote:
snip Even 64 bit printer drivers are not available now and
may not be available in the future for all makes and models of printer
Yes, Epson is being pro-active about it. I already have 64 bit drivers
for my Epson 7600 and R1800 printers (but not yet for my 3200 scanner).
And diminished regard for the manufacturer that fails to support their
product and keep it current is precisely the result and underlines my
point. I'm
Paul:
I bought a 5400 from Morgan a few months ago. It's very impressive: in
batch mode it just ploughs through scanning neg strips (or slides) to a
set of defaults which you define in advance. I'm not an expert but I
have experienced bad and good MMI's / products /software, and this
device is
301 - 400 of 17967 matches
Mail list logo
