thomas_kolbo

Take Bob's advice if you want to get any sleep. First your going to have to read about color management so you have some idea of what and why your doing what. Then once you get to tweaking around with profiling, you will find you are not getting anything done but that and the scans are sitting on the shelf. Then, you are apt to spend some time on this forum asking lots of questions that really need study and homework and practice. Then pay yourself $10 per hour and you could have lots of Cathy's profiles and every target Faust has and at least three scanners.

Hi Folks,

 

Once again I pose the old famous question regarding monitor profiling:

 

Gretag MacBeth EyeOne version 2 or Monaco Optix XR Pro? Yes, I've

read the reviews at Drycreek and glean from there that the saavy

profiler would be best off with Monaco's clorimeter and Coloreyes

software or some combination thereof.

 

I am going to be profiling Sony F500R units which are nearly

identtical specwise to the Sony GDM F520's or the Sony Artisans. I

don't get the impression that the Gretag setup allows one to tinker

with a blackpoint setting. Some have said this can be done with the

Monaco system, but I don't find that in their literature or on their

website.

 

Basically, I'm too poor now to buy in at a higher level for either

manufacturer, so the EyeOne Photo or Monaco's pulse systems are not

possible at this time. Once concern would remain though, and that is

the color management integration with printer profiling. I am liekly

going to go with Cathy's profiles and be done with it.

 

At the moment, I run the monitor at 6500K, 0% brightness and 75%

contrast. It's fine for most work and keeps the tube from burning

out. Both Sony monitors I will be profiling are of similar tube

condition.

 

Thanks for any Sony response experience you may have.

 

TDK

Mendel,

 

Thanks for the holder advice. I think I'm an old hand with epoxies (architectural models etc.). I have not looked on Amazon for extra holders although I'm sure B&H and Adorama have them.

 

As an added question, I have cats and despite anticipating construction of a filtered box for the scanner, it's going to be nearly imppossible to keep cat har and dander from going where it will. Has anyone had experience cleaning the 5400 and sensor?

Mendel,

 

The unit is "new" or at least advertised as new on Amazon for $499.95. I ordered it November 4th and it showed up today even though they say it usually ships within 24 hours (don't know where they got it). But it did ship from Amazon and not a drop ship from somewhere else. I found a Canadian company on Ebay that was selling 3 year Mack warranties for $30 good for this scanner. That showed up on by email and a paper copy as well (it's for real).

 

About a month ago, Amazon had that same scanner "new" for 399.95. I missed that deal by two days.

 

I haven't opened things up yet to check for signs of re-taping boxes etc. But it was in a Minolta box repacked in an Amazon box. I guess if the 1 year warranty card is in the Minolta box, it's new.

 

Adorama was selling these as refurbs with 6 month warranties recently for $449 I think.

 

TDK

The long awaited Minolta DSE5400 scanner arrived today (original

version) new from Amazon.

 

Considering other's comments in posts long ago, I am recall reading

that the little horizontal green line(s) that crop up with some folks'

installations were a result of interference from monitors or too close

placement of the unit to a CPU. Others have thought it was due to

some combination of scanning software and USB or Firewire interface.

I have USB 2.0 and Firewire as well as Silverfast Studio for this

unit. So the questions are:

 

(1) Install with which interface an how far away should it be from

anything with interference.

 

(2) Install with both Minolta software (I hear it's useless) or

Silverfast or both? Does one have to install the Minolta software at all?

 

Thanks! As much as I've read, I'm still a newbie.

 

Thomas D. Kolbo

This is a serious question. I just bought a 5400 from Amazon, they are in the process of shipping. After the order was placed, I read on the Yahoo Minolta Multi Pro forum that Minolta has has some very serious losses this year and may be getting out of the scanner business altogether, not to mention the blow this delivers to those thinking the Multi Pro would be replaced.

 

So, those with Minolta scanners that used the fluorescent light sources should beware and check out where and how to replace the luminares. I think I recall a post during the past few months where a guy illustrated a step by step procedure for tearing down the 5400 (without damaging anything)...seems he decided to clean his own CCD of cat hair and also had a gearing problem. If you do decide to open it up and clean, there is a company that makes patented brushes and cleaners just for CCD's that I discovered last night. Contact Visibledust.com Sorry, I can't help now with the light, but I plan to get replacements somehow when my machine arrives and will post if now one else does.

The computers are HP X4000's dual Xeon 2.6 and 3 gigs of RAM. The drives don't matter, but they are Maxtor 73 gig 10,000 rpm type. I'm using WIN 2000 and Photoshop 7. I have CS but not CS2 and have not loaded it yet. Most of my experimenting has been by eye and until the HP Design jet 90 arrives, I'm printing the practice stuff on an HP 940 inkjet with Kodak semigloss paper. So far I find the print with preview feature shifts colors a bit but I've got a good feel for the change from what I see on the screen to the preview to know how to adjust. It's really all a bit flaky until one can profile everything properly.....assming this scanner works at all. It would be nice to hear something about the install question regarding the Minolta software and Silverfast.

Well, after two years of fence sitting, I finally ordered the first

two pieces of the finally assembly, the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 from

Amazon (New $499,a 3yr Mack warranty I found on Ebay yestereday for

$30 and Silverfast Studio with Kodak and Fuji 35mm transparencies for

profiling the scanner. The remaining pieces will likely be Monaco's

Sekonic/Optix XR Digital Suite and an HP Designjet 90. I've probably

read every post on this site regarding this scanner and comparisons to

the Nikons etc. since the 5400 came out. Yet, there remain questions.

 

(1) In setting up this scanner to be used with Silverfast, I read on

Lasersoft's forum that some wise guy discovered that profiling with

Lasesoft's supplied transparencies and with that product, one only

gets 8 bit scans and the color schemes leave a lot to be desired. Can

I assume this is inherent to the Silverfast software and has nothing

to do with the transparencies?

 

(2) Assuming that fellow was correct, would I be better off trying

the Wolf Faust transparencies? I will be scanning Fuji Astia for new

and recent work and then an assortment of older Kodak chromes and

Kodachrome from the early 1980's. Wolf Faust has a transparency "kit"

for about $75 that covers the Kodak/Fuji stuff.

 

(3) I've read all the dialogue on Monaco vs. Colorvision vs. Gretag

MacBeth for monitor profiling. I have two systems with Sony GDM F500R

monitors that I presently run at: Brightness = 0% and Contrast = 75%

at 6500K. The reason is to preserve the monitor and in a semi-dark

environment it's just fine. There are so many pro's an cons about

comparisons and reiviews, I simply hate the idea of just buying

something to try it. The most compelling thing about the present

Monaco/Sekonic Digital Suite now is that it's available from B&H for

$669 and one gets a L558-R light meter and offers for a free upgrade

to Monaco OptixXR PRo and free EZ Color software offer. Don't know if

the Monaco software has any value at all. Since I shoot with a Canon

F1, there is reason to want that meter out of the deal (it's $450 alone).

 

(4) I plan to use HP's satin paper exclusively unless something else

comes along so I would think one Cathy's profiles for the Designjet 90

would be sufficient?

 

(5) For basic intall of the Minolta, I've read that it is beast to

disable the gamma function on my system first before installing either

Minolta's software or Silverfast. Is this necessary and is there any

reason to install the Minolta software at all?

 

(6) I've read about the little one pixel horizontal green lines

business (seems like a mess). With some much equipment, I can only

position the unit about two feet from the monitor, or ontop of a floor

standing computer. I have considered building a copper case that coud

mount on the underside of a nearby bookshelf, or be turned over and

set on top of the computer. Has anyone considered this type of

shielding would aid in solving the interference problem or am I

barking up the wrong tree on this one. I'll probably build a plexi

box to set over it just ot keep cat hair and dust out.

 

(7) USB2 and Firewire is available (via internal separate Adaptec

card). With Silverfast, what has worked best?

 

I guess seve queations is the magic end to this trip around. I would

appreciate some dialogue. Once I get this working, I'll post some

architectural stuff to get feedback....provided the Minolta works out

of the box (could be a gamble). Thanks

 

TDK

Can you reference where Yaron Kidron has commented on this scanner?

The Designjet 90 uses the Vivera inks. Just go that product on HP's website and look.

I have not seen a good comparison of these two scanners with examples

regarding Kodachromes. I have a larger number of them (architectural

work) frome the 70's on up to about 1983. Presently I shoot mostly

Astia 100 and Provia 100 which for architectural work leans to Astia.

 

I ahve seen some discussion, mostly unanswered questions regarding the

intensity of the light source between these two scanners in regard to

sucessfully scanning Kodachrome. Some think the white led source is

too week to be of value. Once a decision is made, I plan to use the

newer Silverfast Suite and Wolf Faust IT/8's for profiling for the

Fuji films and obviously Kodak for the old chromes.

 

As well, I have seen comments regarding the construction of the 5400II

suggesting is is a much lighter sort of cheesier plastic version with

the obvious new light source and new scanning algorithms that make for

speed and not much else.

 

Are there any experienced scanners out there that have used both in

the Kodachrome environment and perhaps have comments aobout build

quality etc. Don't tell me to buy both and check for myself...maybe

spending $1900 for a Multi Pro would eliminate all the confusion?

Does anyone remember IBM was sold to the Chinese (at the PC level)? Maybe there is a big statement here!

The 8750 and Desighjet 90 use HP's new Vivera inks which are dye based inks like the others use, but have the distinction of being much more pure (much less variation within their own formulation) among other qualities. These inks are a recent development and are not for the 30/130 models or the older 110 and 120 series. HP has a white paper on the new ink technology on the Designjet 90 site on the right hand bar....I didn't look up the link, but once you get to the 90 location, you will see it.

John,

 

Just for the record, the 5400II has not been out there that long, so I would suspect your experiences have been very negative (no pun intended). If you were to reconsider, would you go back to the 5400 instead. The reason I mention this is that I've seen many posts where there have been comments suggesting the slides carriers are well made and a cut above those from other mfrs. I would think if Erik at Scanhancer got his hands on the 5400II and tore it down, we could get a good analysis of the build quality of the 5400II.

The issue of weight in some electronics equipment, particularly those with moving parts is indicative of how much plastic crap is in there. Plastic and nylon gears can buck and chatter and otherwise don't stand up very well. I've been around long enough to witness this kind of cheapening in such items as Sony's portable cassette players. Back in the late 70's and early 80's for example, Sony made a very slim stereo cassete player/recorder with features that didn't come on competitors units until nearly 10 years later. It cost $270 and was extremely heavy (just over shirt pocket size). If you look at similar products now, externals and internals are simply plastic and considered throw away devices.

 

In terms of the scanners we are considering here, I was simply wondering how Minolta could cut 2 1/2 to 3 lbs out of the design and not cheapen things up (just look at the introductory price). The implied larger question, due to the lack of any in depth review, is directed to quality and longevity. If one is anticipating scanning several thousand slides.......?

Since there are no real hard core reviews of this product out there

yet, has anyone managed to make comparisons of K64 scans between the

two units? There seems to be some favorable commentary for the 5400

in this regard, but considering the new white led light source in the

5400 II, I am wondering. This question was prompted by an email

conversation with Eric at Scanhancer who suggested that the product

was not incorporated into the new model and if it were to be added as

a slide carrier insert, it might not work well (ie. Nikon 5000 led

light source is weak for the product) due to the less intense source

of light.

 

Also, has anyone seen some analysis of build qualtiy. Being a German

perfectionist, I usually check what a product weighs as some measure

of that. It seems, the metal in the 5400 has been exchanged for a

thorough girding of plastic in the new model.

If you want a printer that is going to give you a format wide enough for "art prints" at least 16x20 check out HP's site for the new HP Designjet 90/r. This unit should be available sometime this spring and can be fitted with an 18" wide roll stock feeder or print 18"x24" from a feed slot(can't recall whether it is from front or back). It will also print down to 4x6 format.

 

This new unit uses a 6 ink deliverysystem but uses HP's new Vivera inks which are supposed to be much purer (in terms of chemical formulation) and even more resistant to fading coupled with their papers (satin is the best). The inks used on this unit are the same Vivera type used for the new 8750 9 ink unit as noted in an earelier response to your post. You can also go to a UK site called Photo-i and see initial reviews of both printers. I would think by the slightly smaller size of format, the 90/r whould be priced somewhere between the Designjet 30 and 130 ($699 - $1295) for a base model. Time will tell.

 

Another interesting feature for the 90/r is its self calibration mode "closed loop calibrating" which I think is now separated as a functional process from having to have a RIP installed first such as is necessary with the Designjet 130. I could be wrong, but you might want to go to HP's site and download the pdf file on this unit and check it out. There is also a white paper avaiable that discusses the Vivera inks as well.

 

I am waiting for this one to be coupled with the new Minolta 5400II scanner....should be worth the wait (about one more month).

Actually, I just saw a site that suggested the 5400 was introduced May 12, 2003. However, has anyone noticed how the Multi Pro just faded away? Try to find one now, even on Ebay. If one wants one of these in the near future (a new one, say from B&H) so he could get an extended warranty (adviseable considering the numerous posts on returns/repairs) I would think there is some risk in waiting on Minolta to come up with a newer version or improved technology (they certainly need new software). The best scenario would be that they upgrade the Ice version, speed up the scanning time, maybe offer other embedded software and a glass holder for transparencies thereby enabling teh autofocus to be of some use.

 

But, what if everyone waits till late spring?....and they don't do anything. These rumors really annoy those of us who have waited for prices to come down, analyzed and flopped around forums for months finding out what problems others have only to hear the product might be dying on the vine anyway. The only other 35mm option is Nikon for a lot more $, less resolution and crappy single slide feeding.

Well, I've seen this suggestion before numerous times...and the question is then, would turning off the gamma be adviseable for any monitior profiling setup such as Gretag MacBeth Eye-One and Monaco Optix XR?

There are rumors this scanner has been discontinued....anyone know the

skinny on this one?

 

TDK

I've looked all over the leica forum and didn't find any comments about discontinuing. Recall the 5400 was introduced in March and we are not that far away from that month now.

Seems to me if they would drop the price about $500 and bundle Silverfast Studio as well, they could sell a ton of them and Nikon would not have to worry about unfilled demand for the 5000 or 9000.

 

TDK

Has anyone noticed these are now essentially gone? I have not called

anyone yet, but they have vanished even as entries from B&H and

Adorama. Perhaps Minolta has something up their sleeve for a March

debut or they are just phased out?

 

TDK

I just read Andrew Rodney's article in PEI, which by the way has been discontinued as a publication as of December 2004. They have unlocked all their articles and tutorials so anyone can go back and look/print to about 2001 (every issue). I think I am sold on the GMB.

 

For the printing I have done (by eye thus far) via PS 7, I have set the brightness to zero and contrast to 67%. Since both Sony's are newish, this has worked very well. Monitor is set to 9300K at this time. However, for ambient light, I found some Sylvania fluorescent 6500K tubes (CRI = 80) for about $2.50 ea. and suspended the fixtures so they shine on the ceiling and then use a monitor hood. Once the monitor is calibrated to 6500K, I should have a reasonable matching view for the output although I realize a CRI of 80 is a bit flaky. However, since the Gretag can measure some ambiet, I did this thinking that it should at least match the white point I set for the monitor. The ultimate goal is to keep the brightness down so I don't burn up the phosphors. Sony has quit making Trinitron tubes now, so the big 21" monitors are history.

I can accept that. Yep, the Germans are usually both authoritative, knowledgable and (right). Being one myself I can say that. Anyway, I appreciate the comments. I have seen an earlier comparison on "Computer Darkroom" by Ian Lyons and another by the folks at "Dry Creek Photo" who used various monitors and compared GMB, the Spyder2 Pro, Monaco, LaCie and Sony Artisan. Essentially the Artisan won hands down by one would have to buy an $1800 monitor. I am going to calibrate two Sony F500R monitors which are essentially the same thing but without the moniker "Artisan" and any calibration capabilities. The hassle there is the location of the calibration device and the on-screen monitor program (they overlay each other). Dry Creek basically called the comparison between Monaco and Gretag a wash with their preference for the Monaco. Dry Creek makes printer profiles for injets. However, I think I'll go with Gretag. They allow a "buy-up" process, so one can keep moving up their product line in increments.