phil_gunderson

In his picture it's very faint. In tge OPs picture I had to look closely to spot the issue at all. If it were me, I'd try printing it to see if it's even noticeable since it is so faint. As an aside, I've noticed the same problem scanning very dense Kodachrome slides with two of my scanners so it must be something about scanning those high contrast areas. My Nikon does it to a larger degree than his though.

<p>I see what you're saying and yes, I do notice the flaring around the borders into the holder area with negatives as well on both my scanners. I never really thought anything of it there because I cropped it to the regular image area. In the actual picture areas though, I've never seen the double image piece with negatives or lower contrast slides. With the high contrast ones, both the Nikon and Minolta show the issue. I believe my old (and long deceased) Canon scanner showed the issue as well though to a lesser degree than the Nikon or Minolta. The Minolta I have does it the worst and has since it was brand new back in 2004.</p>

<p>Yours has less than CoolScan V does even after I had mine serviced. My Minolta scanner is way worse. I've heard it has to do with the coatings on the CCD itself. Are you just noticing that with slides? That's the only place I have noticed the issue is on slides with bright areas adjacent to dark areas with those two scanners. Oddly enough, the OpticFilm 8200i I have doesn't have this issue at all but has it's own limitations.</p>

I use Vuescan with my Minolta 5400 on OS X. Additionally, you could create a VM and use an XP guest operating system to run the genuine Minilta software, but, for me, Vuescan is so much faster.

i like how mine prints. the pictures are very sharp looking and quite vibrant except on plain paper. Of course the printer isn't intended for plain paper, but while setting it up that's what I used and thought the printer was a waste until I used actual photo paper with it. Then it just stunned me with its quality. I haven't had an inkjet for many years until this one and, wow, what a difference. As far as comparing prints to your current printer, I can't say if it will be better or not. The Pro-100 uses dye based inks, so that's something to keep in mind if you're looking for pigment based, it may not suit you. Like all printers OEM inks are pricy, but you can get refill kits from places like Precision Color. They have ICC profiles for their inks too.

Yes. Vuescan adjusts for the individual orange masks of various films when doing the lock film base color. Here's how I do it. Find a blank frame. Preview it and select a middle section of the frame without the edges. Then click lock exposure. Click preview again. Then after its done click lock film base color. Then, not sure if necessary, I click preview again. After I am done, I then go to the frames I intend to scan and just click scan. No preview needed. Just make sure that focus on scan is set of your scanner supports autofocus. Then I invert the raw image using colorperfect in Photoshop.

With two of my scanners it does make a difference in the raw files. The scans are "exposed to the right" without clipping while also exposing the different color channels individually to help balance the overall exposure. For my scans that helped with noise levels. What I've also noticed is that scans end up being faster overall because you don't need to do a preview and then a final scan. You can just scan the frame if you've either preselected which frames to scan or are simply scanning the whole roll.

<p>From what film is the scan? I've noticed with some Fuji films that my Nikon scanner shows black specks once in a while. I think they used to call that pepper grain or something like that. It doesn't happen with all scans though. In the case of the above, are you able to try just increasing the levels in Photoshop itself to see if the pattern appears there as well? <br> If it doesn't, I'm wondering if something with Lightroom is messing with the picture somehow beyond just exposure. The top picture doesn't seem to show the presence of those specks which makes me wonder.</p>

<p>These came as part of a bundle with the body when I bought it, so I really didn't get a choice as to which 3rd party batteries they sent me. That being said, their customer service is trying to determine whether I just got 2 defective batteries or if the 80D has a check to prevent certain batteries from working.</p>

<p>I couldn't agree with you more. I was just was wanting to ask if anyone else had trouble with 3rd party batteries. With my 20D, the STK batteries I have work quite well. </p>

<p>I agree with you on the risks of lithium batteries, but the testing isn't with my batteries, they clearly do not work. Before I get rid of them though, I need to await Adorama's customer service before I recycle the batteries in case they want them back. Adorama is doing something on their side, testing that battery with the 80D I guess, then letting me know. I am hoping that they let me swap those two batteries for credit toward a genuine Canon battery as well.<br> In the meantime, the batteries are stored inside lipo safe bags which should contain any fire that could result if the battery decides to spontaneously ignite.</p>

<p>That's kind of what I was thinking. Perhaps Adorama put together the package without having tested the batteries to see if they actually worked with the 80D yet. At least with the Canon battery I can keep shooting. :) Quite an upgrade from my 20D for sure.<br> Anyway, I have a message into customer service regarding the batteries. They said they'll do some testing and let me know what they find in a couple days.</p>

Good afternoon, I recently picked up an 80D bundle and with it came a couple aftermarket batteries. For whatever reason the aftermarket batteries will not power the camera. No lights, lcd, or anything. Pop in the OEM battery and the camera comes to life. The batteries were all charged with the canon charger and reflect having a full charge. These are the Green Extreme GX-LP-E6N batteries. Has anyone else had trouble with aftermarket batteries in the 80D? I use a pair of aftermarket batteries in my 20D and they've been working great, but they are a different brand. Thanks.

That should would be base side down. Depending upon the scanner that may yield the best results. With another of my scanners I found it depended upon the film and the curvature to get the sharpest scans. I guess what I'm saying is start with how the particular scanner says to scan the film and then experiment to see what gives you the best results. I use vuescan for my scanners so orientation of the image due to base side up or down causing the image to be flipped makes little difference. My 8800f says the same thing about orientation but, with my scanner, I get better results the other way. Ymmv

The lens on flat beds is usually in the bottom. The lid contains the light the shines through the film when scanning film. My canon 8800f scans best with the emulsion facing down toward the glass and base side (shiny) up toward the lid.

The shiny side should face the light source and the emulsion side (the matte side) should face the lens. That being said, however, due to where the focus for some scanners is set without an autofocus, you may achieve sharper results scanning emulsion side up.

<p>The scanner uses sensors to achieve focus using the tray and sensors to achieve position. The thickness of the tray must be within certain size since the gear mechanism the moves the tray uses spring clamps at the top to ensure it stays in the right plane with the mirror. There is a full gear molded into the bottom of the tray as well.<br> If you can get to where you can make reproductions of the original, provided Konica-Minolta will allow it, you could make a lot of people happy!</p>

<p>I thought I'd add that on fabricating the tray, there are sensor marks that the scanner uses to determine the position of the tray. From the part number, it looks like it's the negative holder you're needing. Is that right? I have the Minolta 5400 as well and can take pictures of my trays if you like; however, I can't say they'll be detailed enough to replicate trays.<br> The scanner can be very picky about the tray as just a little dust on the sensor of mine caused my scanner to go haywire. Taking it all apart, cleaning the sensors, and reassembling seems to have helped.</p>

I'm glad to hear that your scanner is up and going again!

I noticed looking at my phone screen through the sample lens they had how much less harsh the screen looked compared to without. im just hoping that I get the promised so called eye strain relief and it doesn't affect my color perception when editing. I guess worst case would be when calibrating the monitor would be to slightly bias it cooler if I do notice I'm making images too cool otherwise to offset the glasses. If the sleep patter part actually works if be very happy since I don't sleep well now. Hehe Thanks!

I'm considering getting the Hoya Recharge blue blocking coating for my next set of prescription glasses to help with eye strain since I work with computers all day for work. On the side, of course, I dabble in photography and editing. I noticed the lens samples at the eye glass place had a very slight yellow tint when looking though the lens. While I know after a short period I won't probably notice the slight color difference, I am curious to hear if anyone has had experience with these coatings. Specifically in relation to editing photos and having the end results being slightly too blue when viewing the photos without the glasses on. Throughts? Maybe I should just get a second set without the coating for photo editing to prevent color bias. I'm curious. For anyone that has tried these. What was your experience? Thanks!

<p>Maybe drop a line to Alex Ketzer, ABStudios _at_ live.com. He still services the Nikon scanners even after Nikon stopped. I just had mine to him in February. Off the top of his head he may have some ideas. </p>

<p>Are you looking in scanners on the mac for it to be available? Plug in and turn on the scanner. After the scanner completes it's POST, launch Vuescan. If the scanner is working properly, it should then show the scanner in the source combo box. If it says something about scan from file, try clicking the option to see if the scanner appears as another option. Vuescan will not make NikonScan work on an Intel Mac unfortunately.</p>

<p>My VM XP runs my Minolta Scan Elite software through USB through VMWare. I haven't tried NikonScan as Vuescan does what I need it to do (scan to raw, convert in ColorPerfect).</p>

<p>Vuescan isn't a driver as much as it is a separate program, like Silverfast, to run your scanner. Digital ICE and ROC aren't present in the same form, but Vuescan does offer infrared cleaning and color fading and restoration options. They aren't the same as NikonScan, but with Macs, the NikonScan software is very old PowerPC code and, while it can run under rosetta in Leopard and Snow Leopard, rosetta isn't available after Lion came out.<br> Another option could be to run Windows in a virtual machine on your mac so you can run the Windows version of NikonScan and retain the Digital ICE and Digital ROC features. Honestly, I've never really used either of those features in NikonScan since my macs were intel based, and I already had a copy of Vuescan. <br> The infrared cleaning, according to most people isn't as good as the ICE implementation in NikonScan, but it's definitely better than it used to be. With some faded prints I scanned with a flatbed, I was shocked how well the restore fading feature worked in the filters tab of Vuescan. Both those options may do well enough to suit you.<br> With Silverfast, I wasn't very impressed with it's infrared cleaning artifacts. It did quite well detecting (once I had a properly working scanner - in another thread I noted my scanner wasn't picking up defects), but the artifacts it left were almost as ugly or worse than leaving the defects in place.</p>