Multi-Sampling on Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400

rishij · January 23, 2009

I just acquired the original Konica Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400.

Using Minolta's software, when one uses the multi-sampling feature, say at 4x, the software scans a portion of the film once, then rewinds the film, scans it again, and does this 4 times. Then it moves to the next portion of the same frame, and does the same thing all over again. That is, the film carrier moves in and out. I can see this.

This is absolutely inane . What idiot wrote this software/feature? It leads to misaligned portions in the final scan and, presumably, softness from imperfect alignment.

Fire-up Vuescan with this scanner, turn on multi-sampling, and it intelligently multi-samples each line before moving forward. That is, the holder only ever moves in one direction. Intelligent . No artifacts or misalignment.

Has anyone else noticed this? What was Minolta thinking? Can their software be modified/hacked? I kind of wanted to use the original Minolta software for its true ICE & its manual focusing interface, which works very well IMHO.

Thanks,

Rishi

malcolm_denton · January 23, 2009

Rishi....

This does NOT happen on my 5400 running Minolta software. The film carrier remains motionless throughout the 4x scan.

Is your software up to date ? The last version of the scanning software can be found here :

http://ca.konicaminolta.com/support/americas/scanners/dimage-scanners/dimage-scanelite_5400/software_drivers/index.html

peterblaise · January 23, 2009

.

Earlier:

"... What idiot wrote this software/feature? ... What was Minolta thinking? ..."

... versus ...

"... I kind of wanted to use the original Minolta software for its true ICE [infrared Chanel-"noise" Elimination]& its manual focusing interface, which works very well IMHO ..."

Yes, I also noticed sharp conflict between some apparently very photographic engineers within Minolta versus some bone-headed moves, like loosing the world-class slogan:

"Only From the Mind of Minolta"

...in favor of:

"Konica Minolta, the Essentials of Imaging".

Doh -- Minolta's auto computerized everything was NEVER "essential".

Malcom, my Konica Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400 II USB 2 dedicated 35mm film scanner moves the film holder over and over for multiple scans, also. I have also rigged up an additional stationary third-point of contact to guide it as it slides in to prevent it from skewing 4 degrees (another "what were they thinking?" moment!). I last used Windows ME (a dedicated PC that works, so why touch it), so the performance may be OS Operating System related considering what drivers can be loaded (so hack the drivers not the software!)? Dunno.

Minolta sub-contracted the gear itself to an all-purpose fax/scanner/copier factory, but I think they did the software themselves, or paid very little to subcontract it's design. Hacking? Have at it, and let us know if you succeed. I'd LOVE to hack into the DiMage software all around, but it's more than computer-programmer think, it's also Japanese think -- impenetrable in my experience, have you read Minolta's patent applications?

Rishi, may I suggest a gentle pass through one or more intelligent noise reduction programs as NeatImage

http://www.neatimage.com/

... or Kodak's acquired ASF Applied Science Fiction utility GEM Grain Elimination and Management

http://www.asf.com/

... you can build a profile of electronic noise on a dark slide, and then apply it to subsequent real scans. Although, you may also like the film-grain noise reduction capability, speed of one-pass scanning to archive, and the ability to have a quick master scan that you can revisit anytime to perform alternative noise reduction and management algorithms over, perhaps differently each pass.

More on noise reduction at Wikipedia:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_noise_reduction#In_images">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_noise_reduction#In_images</a>

... but some boneheads removed all references to available software! Go-o-o-o Wikipedia deletionists! =8^o Some help at:

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_noise#Film_grain">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_noise#Film_grain</a>

... why even bother trying so save Wikipedians against their will?

Google search for [film scan grain noise reduction]:

<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=film+scan+grain+noise+reduction">http://www.google.com/search?q=film+scan+grain+noise+reduction</a>

Let us know what works out for you. There's a dedicated Yahoo Group where you can find service manuals, but no hacking info, yet:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minoltadimagescanelite/

.

rishij · January 23, 2009

Thanks to both of you.

Yes, Malcolm, that is exactly where I downloaded my software (ver 1.1.6). I use a Mac, running 10.5.6. Interestingly enough, after installation, it says that the Dimage Scan Utility is version 1.0.0 (in Finder).

What does yours say?

This isn't a firmware thing, is it?

Malcolm are you *absolutely sure* it doesn't move in and out? Your comment that it is motionless is a little bothersome, b/c it can't be motionless unless your scanning just one line of your frame. The CCD/optical housing doesn't move in these scanners; it's the carrier that does. What I'm saying is that, while in Vuescan the carrier only moves *into* the scanner during the scan, with Minolta's software it continuously moves in, rewinds, moves in, rewinds, as it's doing just ONE scan!

I can't fathom why anyone would ever think of doing it that way. It just doesn't work!

Peter, I do use NeatImage in fact... great, but if you're not careful, will introduce its own artifacts by amplifying blemishes in the scan. Multi-sampling is really for getting rid of noise in shadows... though I must say that with the Minolta, the noise in the shadows already seems to be quite subdued. Unlike the Nikon LS-4000/LS-5000, which have strange patterns in Dmax areas that don't disappear until you 4x or 8x multi-sample...

I don't really want to speak too soon, but, I can't see why anyone would ever buy the small format Nikon scanners when the Minolta is clearly superior. I'm qualified to say this b/c I've used Nikons (LS-4000/5000/9000) for the last 2 years extensively.

I'm not gonna cry over Minolta's poor implementation of multi-sampling, but, please if there's a way to fix it, somebody let me know! Minolta's ICE is great, and it, unlike NikonScan, seems to actually be able to put out the raw RGB values without conversion to a particular color profile (correct me if I'm wrong) when color management is shut off... which allows one to properly use a color managed workflow using profiles created from IT8 targets and such...

Rishi

malcolm_denton · January 23, 2009

Rishi....

My apologies I was wrong.

After reading your question this morning I ran a check on my scanner - running the test scan at 4x multiscan on frame 1 which meant there was a lot of film carrier sticking out. I went away,came back when it was finishing,and I thought the film carrier hadn't moved because there was obviously a lot still sticking out. However another watched 'wide awake' test this evening shows the film carrier moving slowly in as the scan progresses - roughly by the 36mm I'd expect. The only occasion it moves in and out is when I'm doing my preview scan where it seems to move to position each frame in turn.

Re your other point,I'm currently running 10.3.9 on a Mac power pc.,and my Dimage Scan Utility is showing version 1.1.5. I shall shortly be upgrading to Leopard on my new iMac Intel,hopefully my scanner will still run.

rishij · January 23, 2009

Malcolm,

I'm still confused. Is your scanner moving in and out during the scan when 4x multisampling or not?

With 1x, you'll see the carrier only moving inward, slowly. With 4x, you'll see it moving inward slowly, then moving outward slowly, then moving inward slowly, then outward slowly... it repeats this for however long it takes to finish the scan.

An easy way to witness this is to just look at the film carrier with your head resting on your hand so your head stayes in one position. Then follow the movement of some vertical edge on the film carrier (dark) against some light background (like a wall). You should be able to easily tell whether it's moving inward or outward.

Alternatively, do something even smarter. Hold a ruler under the carrier, watch it move... see if it goes in AND out when multisampling.

I bet you it will go in and out. Which, though perhaps stimulating for some, is a real downer in my book.

Cheers,

Rishi

peterblaise · January 23, 2009

.

I also used the entire Nikon Coolscan suite before opting for the Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400 II for myself. The Nikons, in comparison, were missing something ... or adding something. Up to a point, finished images from the Nikons are very crowd pleasing, but like certain stereo hi-fi speakers, I can tell the difference between pleasing and accurate.

This is not a Nikon-bashing war starter. I fully appreciate the coolness of the Nikon versus the heat inside the Minolta. I keep my Minolta with a small fan on it, and I pre-curve my film to make it return to flat during scan rather than scanning with it curved, as much as possible.

For you, try holding the tray straight during multi scan and see if the overlaps aren't more accurate. I need to take a picture of how I hold the tray during scanning, but the dang tray cocks 4 degrees during scanning if we don't guide it manually (or with some kind of manually configured supplemental jig) because the motor and gears pull on only one side of the tray, and the other side has no "tight" guide.

Nothing's perfect. I just wish someone from former Minolta would setup shop and supported us independently, like former Nikon people made Kiron manual focus lenses when Nikon went auto focus.

Ahh -- all ancient history after a fashion.

Let us know how we can help, and if the service manual is any help -- at the Files section of:

<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minoltadimagescanelite/" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/minoltadimagescanelite/</a>

.

rishij · January 23, 2009

For you, try holding the tray straight during multi scan and see if the overlaps aren't more accurate. I need to take a picture of how I hold the tray during scanning, but the dang tray cocks 4 degrees during scanning if we don't guide it manually

</blockquote>

Wait, are you saying that the tray actually moves in relation to how far away it is from the CCD *during* the scan? Wouldn't that entirely throw off the focus??

I don't have the will, energy, or time to bother with film curl and the dismal DOF of these desktop scanners. Therefore, I use glass to hold the film flat. I'm still trying to optimize the type of glass to use... today I'm off to get some museum glass with optical coatings cut to try to fit that into the holder.

Once you use glass, you get remarkable edge-to-edge focus... thereby never again having to worry . That's worth 100s of hours of effort to get in place, so I don't have to consistently worry & check my scans.

I really hope you're not saying that the holder actually moves away and/or closer to the actual lens/CCD during the scan. That'd be horrific.

Thanks, Rishi

rishij · January 23, 2009

Oh yeah, thanks for the link to the manual. Took a look. Perhaps I will take apart the scanner one of these days once I've confirmed I'm keeping it. I want to look at the optical housing... particularly the grain dissolver. It's not as effective at suppressing pepper grain as Erik's Scanhancer in my Nikon LS-4000... curious to see exactly what the grain dissolver looks like.

Additional modifications to the optics are also always fun, if not a little nerve-racking :)

Rishi

peterblaise · January 23, 2009

.

No, Rishi, the tray cocks so the resulting scan is 4 degrees rotated on screen. The only focus error is due to curl, and I agree 1,000% about the effort to flatten the film. See Nov 21, 2005:

<a href="00EGC6">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00EGC6</a>

... for pervious treeatment of these issues.

5.25" diskette drive faceplate as film de-curler

"... Patience ... is the photographer's best friend! ;-)

I flatten film in a book if I need to - sleeve it first.

Also, I reverse-curve film before scanning by wedging it into a narrow tray lined with microfiber cloth. An old 5 1/4" faceplate for a 3 1/5" diskette drive makes a nice tray. See picture.

With either method, within 24 hours, it's usually flat enough to not scare me for scanning.

Then I scan ONLY the one frame I'm after. By the end of that one scan time, the film has curled again, and so I re-flatten the rest for another 24 hours, if it matters to me.

Also, I think cooler, not hotter is the answer. I've yet to try flattening in a book stored in the freezer, though. I'll get back to you once I try it. ;-) ..."

Rubbermaid-brand "shoe" cubbyhole cabinet for film

"... Question: "What color neg film are you demonstrating?"

Peter Blaise responds: In the picture above "5.25" diskette drive faceplate as film de-curler" of reverse curling film strips, I'm showing a stack of 1999 Fuji Superia Xtra 800 CZ-24 developed by Kodak/Qualex in 1999 -- originally stored loosely stacked on each other in the paper envelope with the prints! Kodax/Qualex cuts in 4s, sometimes leaving 1 or 2 or 3 frames at the end, sometimes ripping or shredding a frame here and there! I LOVE digital capture!

I also have noticed that different film is more or less curly, but I haven't made a chart of my observations yet. What is a good curl specification and measurement system? ;-) Perhaps +/-% "height" measurement when laying flat, like +/-0.01mm? Curly stuff would be +/-2.5mm?!? I have some Ilford black and white that was perfectly flat ... developed locally and stored in sleeves for a couple of years.

I'm storing the scanned strips in "PrintFile" 35-7B4 sleeves. I fold them in sections of 2 strips back on themselves to help hold them flat and encourage reverse curling. I put 'em back in the envelope with the 6x4" prints, if any. I put the whole caboodle in a 1-quart zip-lock bag. I create and print a black-and-white contact sheet and put it in the bag showing on one side and a color contact sheet showing on the other side of the bag if the originals are color. The bags get folded over in half and stored in cubbyhole / pigeon holes - a Rubbermaid shoe cabinet with 6x3 cubbyhole, each cubbyhole is 4.75x6", 12" deep. I store them in chronological order matching my directory names on my hard drive. Each cubbyhole holds about 5-10 film packs depending on number of prints inside each zip-lock bag. Each cabinet holds 90 to 180 rolls this way. I have 8 cabinets at the moment on one wall. I'm not sure what to do with my ancient 11x8.5" chemical contact prints as I don't want to fold them -- I may remove 1/2 of some cubbyhole dividers and lay these contact sheets down.

We're all doing something. Crazy, this photography habit has turned me into an archivist, an archeologist, a librarian, and a scientist. Geesh! ..."

There's probably way more here and at Yahoo Groups and all over the Internet. Report back with your findings, please!

.

mendel_leisk · January 23, 2009

The 5400 does single pass multi-sample scans Rishi, I'm not sure what's happening with yours. It will work thus either with the Minolta Scan Uitility, or Vuescan. Personally I never used multi-sample: it is really time prohibitive (with a scanner that's very slow to begin with), with marginal benefit.

The mechanics of the scanner work as follows:

1. The lens is fixed-focus, and does not move, on the left side of the holder (viewing from the front, scanner vertical).

2. The light source is also fixed, on the right side of the holder.

3. Focus is achieved by moving the holder left/right.

4. Scanning is accomplished by slowly moving the holder front-to-back.

FYI, the Grain Dissolver is an unobtrusive little piece of tranlucent material, clamped into a stamped metal arm that can swing in/out of the light path.

constance_cook · January 23, 2009

I use mine just as Mendel does. It's a great machine compared with the alternatives.

Any time I miss something on mine, I rely on Mendel's expertise.

I, too, never use multi-scan. Not necessary. Most of the film I scanned was Porta.

Conni

malcolm_denton · January 23, 2009

Rishi.......

Like you I got right down and close to watch the film carrier,and it only goes forward into the scanner,no back and fore movement.

Have you tried trashing the software,and reloading from the download site ? In the early days of ownership I often found this sorted things out. In fact I still keep a copy of 1.1.5 tucked away on my hard drive in case I need to do this.

I'm thinking this may be relevant in your case as the scan utility is not showing the version you think you've got.

rishij · January 23, 2009

Mendel & Malcolm,

While that's encouraging, I have yet to see it :) But great to hear you're seeing it only move in one direction! Mendel, you've also observed carefully, I take it, given your incredibly methodical way? :)

Do any of you have a Mac? If so, can you just one-click on the Dimage Scan Utility in Finder, and see what Version it says it is? Mine says 1.0.0

If one of you have a more updated one, can you perchance e-mail it to me as a .zip file? I downloaded the official 1.1.5 version from Minolta's site, so I don't see how downloading it again and installing it again will do anything :P

As for the GD, a 'little piece of translucent material', huh? Guess that makes sense, as the RGB exposure only goes up like 0.4 in Vuescan upon using the Grain Dissolver vs. not. Whereas with the Scanhancer in the LS-4000, it goes up by a factor of like 50! The Scanhancer from Erik is incredible at pepper grain suppression; the Grain Dissolver, unfortunately, is not. Perhaps it's just too thin? I'd like to see it for myself.

Thanks,

Rishi

erik scanhancer · January 23, 2009

Rishi,

The latest Dimage Scan Utility (for Mac) should show Version 1.1.6 inside the program. 1.0.0 is not correct. (See the attachment, but disregard the ROM info since it is of the Multi Pro in this case.) In the finder when info is opened it will say 1.0.0.

Multi-sampling is supposed to be what it says: each line will be sampled several times, without moving the film in between. Earlier versions of Vuescan did what you described: moving the film along the head several times, which indeed resulted in bad alignment of the different samples. Dimage Scan software uses true multi-sampling, to my knowledge. At least it does with other scanners. Moving the film back and forth during the actual scan is not correct. How many samples did you take? There is virtually no advantage beyond 4x.

It is beyond me why so many people do not use multi-sampling. It is vital if you want to get the highest possible quality, especially when scanning reversal film. The differences in shadow noise can be huge and the accuracy of colors becomes greater. (Would there be people who do not use 16bit scanning too? I can see anything gruesome now, in my mind.)

The Grain Dissolver is a thin etched/grained diffuser. Scanhancer is a 3mm thick 3D bubble diffuser with smooth surfaces and no visible structure at all. When Minolta copied the Scanhancer idea the engineers didn't really understand why a 3D diffuser is better to eliminate pepper grain. That's usually the problem with copying: it lacks the understanding of why something has to be the way it is. Perhaps you can replace the GD with Scanhancer material, if there is enough space.<div></div>

rishij · January 23, 2009

Perhaps you can replace the GD with Scanhancer material, if there is enough space.

</blockquote>

I'd love to, if you might be able to cut me an appropriately sized piece :)

Let me see if I can take the scanner apart this weekend, and figure out what the dimensions would have to be. The optical housing is similar to the Multi Pro, but smaller scale, and without the 2nd semi-circular plastic (what I gather to be the light collimator, from your images). But there's space for foil & maybe even a Scanhancer IR... whether or not that is necessary, I'm not sure.

Also, I'm going to try and get some TruVue glass cut today, as per your suggestion. Thanks as always, Erik.

I guess what's really saving the Dimage 5400 at this point, with that thin diffuser, is the cold cathode fluorescent light source. Unless they thickened the diffuser in the 5400 II, I'd hate to see what it does with pepper grain with its white LED. It'd probably look something like the LS-4000/LS-5000 scans which, to me, should be unacceptable by any discerning photographer.

Does it surprise me that the Minolta engineers didn't really care about pepper grain? No. Not when you have scanning operators like Les who don't even really believe in pepper grain (see: <a href="00Ok5u">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Ok5u</a> ).

BTW Erik, I can't see what Version it indicates from inside the program, since it won't load without the scanner, and I'm at work :( I'll check tonight. I definitely just downloaded it from Minolta's website 2 days ago though.

This is very strange.

Rishi

rishij · January 23, 2009

Oh and by the way, here's some empirical evidence to support Erik's claims that 4x multi-sampling is essential (at least with Nikon LS-4000/5000 anyway... the Minolta 5400, in my 2 days of experience, yields much cleaner shadows), but beyond 4x is potentially unnecessary:

Here's 1x vs 4x on a LS-4000 using Vuescan (notice the weird squiggly pattern running vertically in the shadows):

<a href="http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/MultiSampling-1xVS4x.jpg">Link To Full-Size Image</a>

And here's 4x vs 8x:

<a href="http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/MultiSampling-4xVS8x.jpg">Link To Full-Size Image</a>

I see the same exact pattern in Nikon LS-5000 scans, on 5 different LS-5000s that I've tested. The LS-9000 is much cleaner, but introduces a sort of 'green snow' sort of noise. But it's completely gone with 4x multi-sampling, making it better than an Imacon (well, the 848 that I've used anyway) in terms of shadow noise.

Cheers,

Rishi

mendel_leisk · January 23, 2009

Rishi, the last 2 pictures I post here:

<a href="http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/006Uxf">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/006Uxf</a>

Show the effectiveness of the Minolta Grain Dissolver alone. It is quite effective in dealing with pepper grain, as you can see from my postings. Test and compare your own slides: Fuji Provia is a good candidate.

rishij · January 24, 2009

Yeah, so, basically, I still see pepper grain in that picture of yours WITH Grain Dissolver. The Scanhancer COMPLETELY gets rid of pepper grain in the worst type of film even.

I can't emphasize that enough. With no ICE, the Scanhancer COMPLETELY eliminates pepper grain. I can't even see one trace of one speck of one air bubble when using the Scanhancer! I kid you not.

The GD is child's play next to the Scanhancer, in my experience.

But, the Minolta is still incredible. So far it seems I could never go back to Nikon (ugh).

Rishi

rishij · January 24, 2009

Also, on a Mac, I can't find the damn version of Dimage Scan within the program! What the heck?

Somebody who has this software on a Mac... please send it to me?

rishij · January 24, 2009

And how the heck do you get the plug-in to work on a Mac? I'm running OS X 10.5.6 with Adobe Photoshop CS3, and the plug-in won't load :(

malcolm_denton · January 24, 2009

Rishi.......

See the following : http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00OPKw

It may be that you have to use the 5400 in stand-alone mode with Leopard ?

robert_k1 · January 24, 2009

Rishi, if the 5400's multi-sampling behaves as you described, I would also consider it insane and unacceptible. But mine does not. It behaves just as Mendel's. The 5400 indeed has what Erik terms "true multi-sampling". Do your research to confirm it to be a Minolta problem before blaming them.

I tried 5400's multi-sampling early on, and did not notice any registration problem. But I soon decided that the amount of improvement was not worth the extra long scan time.

I was also pleasantly surprised by another 5400 registration "feature", using either the native sw or Silverfast. After focusing and scanning one image, I can change the exposure (without refocusing) and make a second scan. The two scans are equally sharp and perfectly registered when opened in PS as two layers, making it easy to blend them. Not sure if other scanners can do the same.

rishij · January 24, 2009

Hey Les -- your comments mean so much coming from a guy who doesn't even believe in pepper grain and/or a properly color-managed workflow. Or from someone who can't even get edge-to-edge focus in his LS-5000 scans, as evidenced in your scans on your site when viewed at 100%. Certainly, at this point, one may presumably question your abilities as a discerning scanner operator.

The 3rd time I've declared a product to be a problem... and been proven false? Really?

<ul>

<li>You mean like when I personally discovered pepper grain, only to be corroborated

in my observations by a whole slew of folk that it was air bubbles in film (which I verified under a microscope) and Vuescan's IR subtraction of said air bubbles? (<a href="00Ok5u" mce_href="00Ok5u">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Ok5u</a>) </li>

<li>Or like when I discovered that NikonScan's auto-color treatment of negatives didn't always work when the negative orange mask was significantly deviant from standard. Nope, even then I was corroborated

by many 'chromoholics' (i.e. not

you) that NikonScan is unacceptable in any color-accurate workflow... a small but significant fact which inspired Erik Krause's 'Super Advanced Workflow' (which, it would seem from your posts, you still don't even know about)

</li>

<li>Hmm, like when I <a mce_href="00Obu1" href="00Obu1">discovered</a> Nikon LS-4000's dismal depth of focus? Nope, I was corroborated

then too, to discover that LS-5000 had a better DOF, but still not good enough for all frames of film. Hence my quest to find better ways to hold film flat (AN glass, optically coated glass, etc.). You still happy with your FH-3 holder and your unfocused-edge scans? Where's the grain (i.e. focus) in this crop from one of your scans, as Mendel so eloquently pointed out in <a mce_href="00DgKE" href="00DgKE">this</a> thread?

<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00D/00Dkuq-25920984.jpg" mce_src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00D/00Dkuq-25920984.jpg" alt="" align="center" height="341" width="511"> </li><li>Oh, I see, perhaps you speak of my <a mce_href="00RTYM" href="00RTYM">LS-9000 vs. Imacon 848 comparison</a>, where many disagreed with the initial softness of my scans. No, wait, you can't be speaking of that, because I verified my results myself, found that that particular version of Vuescan was setting the focus at a corner of the film, fixed it, then reposted with all corrected data. Certainly, that can't be called 'limited sampling' if I methodically found the problem and fixed it, and took the criticism like a man instead of just running away (need I say 'like you do'?)? </li>

</ul> That's not even it. I could go on and on. But why waste my Saturday morning? My results are entirely independently verifiable, but only by those capable & intelligent enough, able to devote enough scrutiny to the subject. I certainly wouldn't expect that of you, someone who can't even see pepper grain (ever put film under a microscope?) nor realize the importance of profiling the color response of one's scanner. So what exactly is your issue Les? Do you just have it out for anyone who doesn't think that the Nikon LS-5000/9000 + NikonScan = heaven? Please let us know. Or run away like you usually do when you're proven wrong by me, or <a mce_href="00Ok5u" href="00Ok5u">Roger</a>, or <a mce_href="00RTYM" href="00RTYM">Scott</a>, or...

rishij · January 24, 2009

Here, independently verify this :

<a href="http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/Minolta5400_MultiSampling.m4v">http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/Minolta5400_MultiSampling.m4v</a>

It's a video, showing the film carrier going in and out repeatedly during 4x multi-sampling using Dimage Scan Utility 1.1.6 on Mac OS X 10.5.6.

For the full video (160MB download), go here:

<a href="http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/Minolta5400_MultiSampling.AVI">http://staff.washington.edu/rjsanyal/ScanningWoes/Minolta5400_MultiSampling.AVI</a>

-Rishi

Sign In

Multi-Sampling on Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in