rainer_viertlb_ck

i was reading a lot of that cooling a scanner chip makes sense to

reach less noise in the scans. so the imacon 848 seems to be the same

machine than the 646, just with the difference that the chip is

aktively cooled. so isnt it possible to cool a ccd chip even if the

construction was manufactored without cooling? it should not be so

difficult to do this- with some cooling element which fits the chip

or a fan which is mounted over the chip.....could this be a way of

scanner tuning? does anyone have experience or advices about?

i am using a polaroid ss120 for medium format too. the scanner is very sharp, good colors etc......i didnt saw a significant diffference to the imacon 646 i just had standin aside the polaroid. but ´the filmholder is not good enough to hold films larger than 6x9cm flat enough to be sharp allover the image. the same to the nikon 8000 and all scanners with similar filmholders. i use a lot of 6x12 and 6x17cm format and there fore the scanner is not good. i bought the additional glassholder,- but there i become crazy with cleaning and with dust........

thats really worse...and the guys of imacon have don much better with their system to put the film around a circle inside the scanner. so it is absolutely in focus cause the film cannt move.

i am thinking about a howtek4500 with silverfast 4.0 which is offered

to me. does anyone know how is the scanner in the aspect of dmax. the

scanner has a dmax of 3.8 which doesnt seem much......but maybe the

number is realistic and all the other which i hear from comapanies as

imacon polaroid nikon etc. are not.....so does anyone know how is the

noise and the resolution in dark zones of the slides in comparation

with actual generations of ccd scanners...?

 

and: is the scanner able to scan in rgb and in cmyk if i use

silverfast softwre....?

i think too, that it just makes a difference how the scanner use its dynamic range in the three colors it can read.

but,- even i am using photoshop a lot of, the color handling a.e. in silverfast is faster and for easy changes very usefull. photoshop can do the same,- but to many functions does not work with 16bit,- or worther if you word in lab mode in 16bit. anyway--the flextight software doesnt know lab...what a pity,- cause i like it to have icc endependent working files which dont loose colors if you change them to rgb or th cmyk.

 

but could be a good idea just to starage the rough data of the drum scanner...if he can do this. i know to little about this machines just now.

 

greatings from cold germany

rainer

i am thinking actually too in a crossfield celsis 240 or an optotech 4000dpi scanner. there are offers in ebay germany right now.

 

i started to think about drumscanners again,- cause i just received a new imacon flextight646 on thursday....and i was not able to let him run stable on my windows2000 system. i installated nearly two days!!!! tried everything what seems to me to be possible,...the imacon doesnt like my computer. so i start to think in an alternative and to cancel the contract,- if possible. i am not opened to installate a second computer with lan and so on......if the thing will become so complicate to run stable.....i think i will prefere to have an used drum scanner, then i will not sell my polaroid 45ultra 4x5" and my polaroid sprintscan120 medium format scanner and use them for lowerend and faster scans and the drumscanner for highend publications or clients who have the need to highend scanns.

i had the hope to buy with the imacon a easy to handle system which reach nearly drum scan quality.......but it seems i have bad luck with its compability for windows or at least for my system.

how difficult is it to reach professional results with an older drum

scanner...? especially for slides.....but in general. is it so

dificult? isnt there scansoftware too which works with similar

gradation curves as silverfast and similar consumer softwares...?

hi robb...

i used now a long year a polaroid ss120 in addition to a 45ultra....to reach now the point to sell them and to buy an imacon 646.

i scanned a lot of 6x17 from my technorama and 6x19cm 360degrees roundshot,- really conten i was nearly never. i did the same as described above: i scanned in two halfes of 6x9cm, the images out of the scanner have some overlap ( or three 6x7 images for the roundshot ) and let them stitch together with the panorama maker programm from the panoramafactory. www.panoramafactory.com. a great programm and it is shareware. but even my computer is a p4 2,4ghz with 1,5 gb ram i can not stitch 4000dpi together,- anyway i didnt needed it too.

the problem of this technique is more that the image in this kind of scanners as the SS120 or the nikon isnt lying flat enough to be really sharp on every point,- sometimes the film is enough flat to be sharp,- but mostly not. this depends on how the film leaves the lab or if the scanned image is from the end or from the middle of the film. you should know that 1/10mm is enough to be visible out of focus,- at least in comparation with drum scanns or the imacon the results dont satisfy. no solution.....except the horrible glass holders,- i bought one for 100� to find a solution for this problem,- and i never used it cause the dust problem increases horrible.....

so if you want to buy one of this two scanners mail me.....the image quality of the ss120 is really good,- of the 45ultra ok, but not exciting in the shades. for negatives for the reason of some shattering in the white parts of the image the 45ultra is unusuable.

greatings from germany

i think you should buy the 58mm. you have then the choice to buy later a 37mm schneider or a 35mm rodenstock lense for 6x9. the 35mm is a absolute great lense for 6x9 or 6x12. and my experience is that it is comfortable to work on 4x5" with the 58mm. you see everything good with a fresnell ....and so on. the things become little bit more complicate with the 47mm,- but still manageable. i use all the three lenses 35/47/58/72mm , normally for architecture,- and here i find situations where i need all this extreme wide angles.

 

in your collection of lenses you should thing too, that the step from 75 down to 47 seems to be too large.

 

about center filters i am not very exact,- cause i dont see a noticeable difference between the different offers from schneider,- so i use a center 3c, which shades 2stops down for the 35, 47, and the 58mm. a center 3b,- which shades 1,5 stops,- i use for the 90mm f8 and ( sometimes ) for the 110XL. the 72XL has its own center.

i dont use the ultra45 with glass holders,- this problem has the sprintscan with large dias 6x17 or 6x18 which i use too. with this sizes it has a problem to be sharp cause often the film is not flat enough ....so i bought the glass holder,- which i hate. the 4x5" films on the ultra 45 seem to lie enough flat and also enough sharp ,- please consider that the professionel use of my scans will not be bigger than max. 400% or 1200 dpi......so if i dont see a noticable difference in sharpness, colors and shades at this magnification the investment will not be worth for me. although my main focus is the quality of the 4x5" fotos,- if i want high quality i nearly use this size only,- and the sprintscan 120 seems to me to be better than the 45ultra,- except the problem with the filmholder. software problem i dont have with both, cause i use silverfast for the scanners. also i nearly dont use negatives.

at the moment i study what i can find about how to scan correctly, cause i noticed that the weakest part of my digital chain at the moment is ME,- for a lack of knowledge how to scan correct.....if you know good links about this theme please tell me,- i actually read one, which seems to be very interesting: http://www.marginalsoftware.com/HowtoScan/Introtocurves.htm

interesting...now i was searching test reviews bozt the 45 ultra too. well mostly they arent very enthusiastic...but the critics are nearly all bout features which are not interetesting me...as how it works for 35mm and mf and so on. my interest in this is only 4 x 5 " . has anyone experience with the polaroid 45 ultra in comparation to imacon or drumscanners?

hallo...thanks for your sharing you experience. my attention at the moment goes to the imacon 646,- it seems to be the same chip as the 848 just not cooled and therefore slower with little less shadow res. but the differnence of 7000,-- euro or dollars is a lot of...and the speed is not so important to me. i believe that 2000 dpi for 4x5" will nearly allways be enough. what do you think of the two polaroids i am useing at the moment...for 4x5" the 45ultra and for 6x6 - 6x18 the sprintscan 120. he makes problem because it is not easy to have the film flat, without using the glass holder...which i hate for the dust which you have to remove later.....

the reason to upgrade my scanner is that i am used to scan my pictures for my clients, mostly they look better as from unengaged digi.operators. now i started to work for a great museum and i offered them the scanns of my pictures ,- and they will published now my pics on a very high nivel in books and magazines......

so ( maybe its crazy ) , but i want to improve to learn to do this electronic part of my work good........and not to fall on my nose with the digitalisations,- ( cause the people of the museum love my photos...).

so i study and study now about scanning....and i believe that my polaroids wont bring the essential quality, but maybe this is wrong and at the moment its just me who fails....

what will bring me more quality? a new imacon scanner or a used drum

scanner...a.e. the Howtek 4000 or 4500 Series. At the moment i use a

polaroid 45ultra and a polaroid sprintscan120...and i want to reach

better quality, without having 20.000,--.....has anyone experience or

advices?

thanks....

hi pierre,

i use a nikon coolpix4500 to make demo shots, or to go to an object ( architecture ) and to use the nikon as a notice book. especially beaceuse there exist lense adapters down to 24mm and a zoomable fisheye it is a interesting "demo" cam. although it has a build in perspective control via software....very very usefull for me. so i found very good scenes, which i realised finally with my lf. also it is not bad to see contrast light situations and how will be the light color in mixed light situations,- of course this will be only rough, but enough to help something. i use 35mm leica R8 too for detail shots....and i nearly always use the leica in dificult situations inside to see what is telling me its metering, often the leica R8 meters great and i thing always about what it tells me in comparation to my spot metering.

 

nearly i bought the s2, but having it in my hands i didnt liked the feel and i decided to wait till the kodak 14megapixel camera will appear, probably i will stop to use my leica then.....lets see how good the resolutron and the handling finally will be...

does a minolta color meter IIIf show the colors of an 21" monitor

exactly enough to calibrate the monitor coors? i dont want to spent

so much money in a calibration sensor as they cost......does anyone

know a solution which is cheaper and also exactly,- the colormeter i

own and it measure the monitor output......

thanks for helping

hi armin...

does this measurement holder works on a linhof international back?

i have a offer to buy a sinar booster...and i think it could be very

usefull for macro work or interiol work...( architecture ). has any

one experience using it...and: is it possible to use this thing

without additionals from sinar.....except the minolta flash meter to

interpretate the information. i mean do you meter on the groundglas

or do you need a adapter for the booster too....is there a way to use

it too with a gossen profisix?

hallo stefan....

good to read that you understood the point of my view, which is absolutely not only the question about the resolution,- more that i wonder myself about the consequenzes for us prof. photographers in terms of our future work. and i believe that the change of the clients and their opinion is one of the most important points in this discussion and also the more and more close distance from ambitionated private shooters to profs in some aspects. as i said before,- what astonished me in my nikon coolpix at most is the possibility to shoot pictures as night shots, portraits against the sun. sunsets, neon lights, flash and ambient, sequenzes till 30 fr. per second, full manually, semimanually control....nearly all what you wish to have and more. and- for the fast possibilty to see the pictures on the display every 8 years old guy can use it succesfull and fast. and this is the difference to a 250 dollar analog cam, which offer more than enough possibilities too,- but you have to become firm in photography to use more than the programm automatic.....which makes horrible pictures if you dont know to use it. with the digi cams...everybody will be able to shoot very difficult things....in acceptable quality- depending on the eyes of the viewer.

clearly not in the aspect of good picture compositions and so on.....but lets wait how this "easy to use" possibilities will change the taste and the use of the photography....in music it happened more drastically than anybody could imagine. here in germany with techno and ambient sounds which you listened in any corner,- and even more subtil and very drastically ,- in the rationalisation of living musicians....at first drummers in the 80is....later nearly all studio instrumentalists, and each of this people has been really virtuos. you can count on one hand the cases where the use of samplers increased in this aspect the quality of the music, but it was only done cause it was cheap and people who cannot write one note had instant access to a string ensemble....and it was sounding good enough if you have not learned to listen good......as most people never have learned. about economics: the prices in the 80s for a midrange sampler was app. 10.000 dollars, it offered less than 1% of the possibilities of the machines 10 years later,- a real prof. sampler had in this time a price around 125.000 bucks ( minimum ! ). 10 years later the price of a machine ( which had much more possibilities ) was at 5.000 dollars.......and a consumer sampler....also much better than the 10.00 dollar machine from the 80is was at 500 dollars.

imagine this for photography,- and i fear similar things will happen here too.

 

 

so: will our clients accept in future the costs and

the time we will consume more in analog photography?

 

please no more advices that i should go out and shot as great as other photographers did it 100 years ago...and similar nice comments. believe me : i go out and i shoot...and i do my best. but therefore i want and i need to live from it,- and i just think about my and about our future as profs.

greatings to all...

und schöne grüße an meinen kollegen aus deutschland.....

no...television was not killing books, cause this are two pair of shoes.

but compact discs have killed records, even the cd doesnt sound better, it is just more practical. so a handfull of listeners still use records...( as me ), but 97% of the market are made with cd,- and nearly all with digital produced music.

my question above is about prof. photographers....

i shoot architecture and i use LF and the cams described above,- and sometimes 36mm for details or for documentations etc.

now few weaks ago i just wanted to buy me a fuji s2, reading about it...but after holding her 1 minute in my hands, i didnt bought it,- so cheap the feeling of the body was.istead i bought a little nikon 4500 cam, thinking to use it for fun. now i am really astonished......not so much bout the picture quality,- but about how easy and practical it is to use such a cam......and i think it makes it so easy to shoot even difficult pictures,- wherefore you needed a lot of experience to shoot them with conventional film ,- that many many prof. work will disappear in the future cause it will be too easy and too cheap to make the pics without knowing much about photography.....sure many of you will be now very disappointed bout my writing and think...whats about picture, about composition....b+w...baryt....scheimpflug...etc...etc

but i think the problem could be: that the prof. nivel will go down and many of us will be without work,- and just the best ( and the best names....) will be able in future to live from photography. i hope that especially in arch. work this will happen slowly...but maybe i`am just dreaming to be optimistic.

i was living nearly 20 years from writing music for films, the last years i made my old hobby to my new prof.: shooting film esp. architecture. i am very happy that my working situation seems to run good...but in music i made the experience in the 80s what does it mean.,- such a change from analog to digital. the result here in germany was fatal. 95% of all studios closed....the filmmusic in television has commonly a nivel now, that every schoolboy can produce it on his pc ( well i describe it a little bit drastically,- but more or less its true....)

and now i have fear to live the same thing a second time in my life....thats all....

greatings from germany

what are your opinions bout the future of high class largeformat

equipement and photography.....a.e. i just bought a 6x17cm linhof

zechnorama and also a 360degrees roundshot seitz camera, working on

mf film.......how long i will be able to use this equipment till the

digital cams will offer similar quality...and much better handling

and costs. if i think to the new kodak fulllframe cam with 16mill

pixel....i spmetimes believe..that in two years the world of us

analog photgraphers will be dead.....more or less....

what do you think about?

which angle of view has the 5,6/360 symmar? the optic which you could

change in a 12/620 optic, removing the back lense. does anyone know

the angle of the optic and the circle of image?

thanks......

i amusing the polaroid scanner for all medium formats till 6x17 cm and the results are very good. it is fast and the scanns are great looking..........6 x17 abd 6 x 12 i scan in two parts, the scanner has some overlap between two neughbour scans..and in panorama factory i stich them together. also it is a goo d choice for 36mm.

greatings

i know that they will sell now a ring for the 72mm lense of the technorama 617. this ring will protecct the lense that you damage her, meanwhile you let the camera stand on the lense to change the film......and there are lots of possibilities more to damage the shutter if you touch the front elemt a little bit......happened to me, the ring in the shutter was damaged 2/10 of a millimter....costs were around 500 dollars. so i will be happy if they bring out something to have more protection, cause this can happen without such a ring very easy....

allways happens the same with digital signals...( in music recordings happens the same). you have more space overall to record your signal, but if you come over the limit.....it cuts the signal promptly and for 100%. conventional film is compressing the signal in its end of the range...therefore it works softer in the ends of its range. this effect is stronger on negatives...( where you nearly cannot overexpose the lights...) but the same effect happens on slides too.

are the af lenses more difficile to focus than the manual ones, if

will use them on an older f2 or similar.....?

has anyone experience with the quality of the coolpix fisheye adapter

lense fc-e8 ?