lutz Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Scan time for 16bit grayscale 2900dpi on Coolscan IV ED under Mac OSX 10.3.3, 1.33 GHz Powerbook G4, Vuescan: 1'45" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_w. Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Thanks Guys, I have bookmarked this thread for future reference, as I will be in the market for a scanner soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Robert, <br><br> <i>>>I am astonished by the relatively fast scan times quoted for negatives when using ICE and GD. On my 5400, scan times exceed 10 minutes, and I have 1.8Gb RAM<<</i> <br><br> Is your scanner connected to Firewire or a USB<b><u>2</b></u> port? Are you using the Minolta DiMAGE Scan latest version? (1.1.5 I believe, download from Minolta site) Even Better, have you tried SilverFast or VueScan? I hate VueScan but both seem to scan much faster than DiMAGE Scan, sometimes almost 40% faster. Scanning from outside Photoshop is about 30% faster than from within and frees Photoshop to edit other images in the meanwhile. <br><br> Does your computer have a second disk for scratch memory? This improves performance a lot. I have two 700rps IDE disks and just this week installed a 120GB SATA. <br><br> How much video RAM do you have? For some reason this seems to affect scan performance too. I have an Xcalibur 128Mb card. Keep in mind that you're working with <b>huge</b> amounts of data. <br><br> When I got my first 5400 unit (the one that failed) I experienced very long scans with DiMAGE Scan 1.1.0. Some weeks later 1.1.1 appeared and it improved a bit. Now 1.1.5 is almost as fast as SilverFast 6.2r4. It seems to pay to have the latest revision of whatever you're using. <br><br> In any case, 10 minutes is a loooong time. The worse I've experienced was about 7 or 8 minutes for single passes with ICE and GD on, for a color neg at 48 bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Lutz, If you want, and don't mind me choking your email box with a few Mb of data, I can send you a pair of TIFF scans at 5400 and 2700 (zipped, of course) so you can handle at your pleasure; print even, if you like them. I'm now in Guadalajara but will be back in Uruapan by Tuesday. Let me know if that would help... Pick any image you like from my gallery, just make sure it's from 35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 11, 2005 Author Share Posted February 11, 2005 Lutz, again... <lt>ggg> <br><br> <i>>>although I'd really love to see a side by side comparision between the Minolta 5400 and a Nikon Coolscan IV ED, with scans from the same neg<<</i> <br><br> If there's someone with a Coolscan IV ED (preferably in the continental vicinity, Mexico-USA-Canada or NAFTA area) and is game, I propose the following: <br><br> I will scan one color and one b&w negative that I have duplicated (sometimes I shoot the same subject two or three times, just to make sure), make all kinds of scans as variables can be had and fit to a 700Gb CD, burn and send them by snail-mail to the Coolscan owner along with the negatives. Then post to a PN gallery. We would take notes of equipment and scan times. Should be fun and illustrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Jorge,<p>Since you are generously willing to take the bait ;-), how about selecting - as you suggest - any secondary but sharp and fine grained b&w neg plus a transparency, squeeze the best out of them with all your Minolta 5400 expertise (once @ 5400, once @ 2700 or 2900dpi), burn the TIFFs to a CD and mail them to me along with the originals?! I would give my best with my Coolscan/Vuescan set up, burn another CD and mail everything either back directly or to a third person with another set up...?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Good morning...:-)))!<p> On second (careful) reading I see that this is more or less exactly what you have been suggesting. It's still a bit too early for me, and the 700 *GBs* mislead me into thinking that the "CD" in your proposal was a HD... Sheesh...;-)<p>Anyway, is there anybody third out there willing to join the Massive Scanout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 12, 2005 Author Share Posted February 12, 2005 Lutz, <br><br> <i>>>700Gb<<</i> <br><br> LOL! I was being harried by my wife and daughter to close the 'puter and take them out to dinner. I didn't read the message twice... :-) <br><br> Are there any 700 Gb drives out there yet, BTW? I just got me a 120GB SATA and was under the impression the largest at the moment was around 200Gb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 12, 2005 Author Share Posted February 12, 2005 PS, I'll put myself to the task during the week and mail them to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Take your time, Jorge. I'm looking forward to it. Oh, <a href="http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10551">BTW...</a> ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted February 12, 2005 Author Share Posted February 12, 2005 <i>>> Oh, BTW... ;-) <<</i> <br><br> "Only" $1,999? I'll get two... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BVqZ">Scan resolution comparison</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 re: slide sharpness... I've not yet tried scanning glass-mounted slides (eg with Leitz or GEPE anti-newton on the newton-disposed backside) but that will be interesting. Multiple passes at differing focii (ha!) is worth exploring...think about the Hassleblad Softar, which produces multiple layers of focus in one shot...very attractive, looks simultaneously soft and sharp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Lutz, if your modified versions (B&W) equaled Jorge's originals you'd be right...but they don't...your method lost important detail...in Jorge's originals the 5400 is obviously sharper around the watch and in the tweed. The tweed is an especially important element in the photo because it's got the finest detail. You're presumably right neither scanner, used however Jorge used it, would have a "practical" advantage, if "practical" means little 11X14 prints...especially on a soft paper such as Entrada. ...and if the Minolta was manually focused the difference might widen, since the Nikon is said to be difficult to override (it's easy on the 5400 II incidentally, though selected-point autofocus is even easier). It's odd to assert that differences aren't "practical" one moment, then drift to discussion of scanners that cost $1800 :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 <i>I've not yet tried scanning glass-mounted slides (eg with Leitz or GEPE anti-newton on the newton-disposed backside) but that will be interesting.</i><p> I have, unfortunately the glass surface pattern showed... :-( Thanks for mentioning the Softar - that sounds quite interesting. Do you have any sample pics?<p>Oh, and I have never encountered any problems select focussing with my Coolscan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now