phil_gunderson

Another vote for Vuescan. It can be a complex program to use but once you get the knack of it, it does a good job with many different scanners. I use it on more than one Mac with a coolscan V and it works great. The scanner does not show in printers and scanners because there aren't drivers installed. Vuescan doesn't need manufacturer provided drivers to run the Nikon scanner so it should detect the scanner without problem. Just make sure to plug in and turn on the scanner then launch Vuescan. You can download a trial of Vuescan to make sure everything is working. If you're happy with the result, I believe you would need to get the pro version, $80, to get the film scanning capabilities, but I may be mistaken. Anyway the pro version is great because you get lifetime updates whereas the cheaper version doesn't.

<p>No worries, I just thought I'd suggest it. As far as Negative Solutions negative carriers, I can't speak for the Epson, but I did buy a 110 version for my Plustek scanner. It works pretty well once I figured out which way it had to be oriented. They're well made, if a little rough around the edges (figuratively speaking).</p>

You may be able to get your Nikon scanner going again. ABStudios still services some Nikon scanners. I recently had my Ls-50 in for service in February.

I can give it a try on the others later this weekend if you put them online.

<p>Here's an attempt at it. Hopefully it looks okay.</p>

<p>First pic link.</p>

<p>Hi again, yes the hand color is something that can be addressed. The picture looks like it was shot with them facing into the setting sun so overall the color will be more orange.<br> I'm not sure about 30% more detail in the dark zone on the second picture as much of what's there is noise too. I've increased the dark area brightness some more. Hopefully it's a bit closer to what you're wanting. <br> These are just quick edits, but hopefully they'll be helpful.</p>

<p>and now with the link....</p>

<p>Here is the first attachment. It's maybe a little better, but I don't know for sure what you were looking to achieve, so hopefully it is at least more usable in this state.</p>

<p>I took a coach at the second one just to see what I could get. From the noise in the darker areas, it looks like it was underexposed because of the bright sky. Hopefully the attached gets you a bit closer. </p>

<p>In this particular scan, I did not use any PEC-12 on the negative. The streaks present are those that were present on the film from the lab. What I'm trying to figure out is how I can clean the film to remove those streaks on the emulsion side. The lab is a dip and dunk lab, so I'm trying to understand just what those streaks could be.</p>

<p>Good morning,<br> I recently got back some 35mm negatives I sent to a dip and dunk lab that both had water spots all over the base and odd streaks on the emulsion side that ran the length of multiple negatives. Some of the rolls were shot in different cameras, so I think that can eliminate the camera being the issue. For the sake of checking, I scanned a few negatives on two different scanners with similar streaking results. When I looked closer at the emulsion under bright light, I did see very slight marks (not scratches) near the sprockets but encroaching into the frames.<br> Does anyone know what could cause this or how I can clean/fix the problem? I know I could do some in Photoshop, but that will definitely be a last resort as it will take quite a while for all the frame (provided all turned out).<br> <img src="http://i708.photobucket.com/albums/ww88/phgunder/ektar_streaked_scan.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="900" /><br> In this image, you can see the lighter/darker streaks along the edges. In the middle there are a couple marks as well. The middle ones are smudges that were left on the base. All in all, I am just not sure how to clean these. PEC-12 just made a mess on the base - looked like an oily mess.<br> Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!</p>

I have it set to autofocus always since that yielded better results when I scanned with my Minolta scanner. That's why I figured it would be the best option here.

<p>I don't have a computer capable of using Nikonscan (Macs), but I do have Vuescan set to focus always, but perhaps there's something I'm missing in the settings for the Nikon scanner that is causing it to only focus on the first frame of the strip. Sharpness is very good when I scan an individual frame, so I may be stuck doing that to scan the negatives I have. I had hoped to have it set to scan a strip while I'm working on other things so I can multitask to a degree.</p>

Good afternoon all, I have a Nikon Coolscan V that when using the film strip adapter, I noticed that despite vuescan being set to focus always, the focus drifts such that the first frame is pretty good and the last is noticeably softer. Each frame is slightly softer than the previous. The negatives are fairly flat without much curl. Rescanning each frame individually brings the frames back to grain sharp. What I'm wondering is vuescan only focusing on the first frame and not for each subsequent frame in batch mode? This is my first Nikon scanner. Previously I used a Canon fs4000 and Minolta 5400. They always focused each frame so we're very good about sharpness frame to frame. Thanks

Kalamazoo Color in Michigan will push c41.

<p>I tested with the SilverFast 8 SE software that comes with the Plustek scanner as well. Since I'm using a Mac I can't use their other software for the quick scan, and the like. It made no difference in the output. I bought the SE edition because I had no intent to use the SilverFast software.</p> <p>I've been using Vuescan now with several scanners for many years, and this is the first time I've had so much difficulty with the IR channel. The Canon FS4000 I had before my Minolta was the first film scanner I had. I use Vuescan to output linear raw tiff files with the cleaning applied by saving the raw output on Save rather than on Scan per the Vuescan instructions. It's always worked fine with the Minolta scanner to do it that way.</p> <p>In Vuescan, I even output the IR channel itself and found that it barely showed anything which is why it seems as though the IR exposure level is so low the software cannot detect anything.</p>

<p>For whatever reason, using the same software between the two, the Plustek is not doing any cleaning in the output while the Minolta does. Again, that's with Vuescan for both scanners. I use spot/heal already, but even with what appear to be impeccably clean negatives or slides, there always seems to be specks that get through. With Vuescan and the Minolta, it would appear that the clean up works much better than with the Plustek and Vuescan *and* Silverfast 8. The merchant said use Silverfast, which I did tonight with no better results. That's why I'm thinking something with the scanner is odd.</p>

I recently picked up an OpticFilm 8200i on sale for under $300 nib. While it is no match for the resolution of my Minolta ScanElite 5400 gen 1, the scans are quite good for my purposes with one exception. The infrared channel doesn't seem to pick up the defects in the frame, or at least very many of them. I use the current version of VueScan and even compared frames between the Minolta and the Plustek. The OpticFilm clearly was now either exposing well enough or wasn't detecting very well. The negative I was using was fairly clean but has a few scratches on it. Has anyone else had poor infrared cleaning experiences with the OpticFilm 8200i? I contacted the merchant about it but haven't heard back as yet.

There are a few things you can do. With the DSLR, I've "scanned" color negatives and slides by putting my DSLR on a tripod facing down toward my light box with a macro lens attached in a dark room so the only light is that of the light box. Mask around the slide or negative frame to cut down on glare. I shoot in RAW and use the MakeTiff app from the developer of ColorPerfect. After making the tiff files from the RAW ones I open them in Photoshop and use the ColorPerfect plug in to convert. That combination yields some pretty good results, but I am resolution limited with my 20d doing that method. YMMV Another option is to pick up a dedicated film scanner. The older ones like the Nikons or Minoltas typically yield excellent results and, using a program like vuescan, can create linear raw tiff files that can be processed with ColorPerfect as well. I recently picked up an OpticFilm 8200i since my Minolta ScanElite 5400 has been getting grumpy about working reliably anymore. As far as negative films and properly exposed slides I was quite impressed with the results color wise. Resolution is less than that of my Minolta but without autofocus that's to be expected. The scans I did, I had the scanner run at full 7200ppi and Vuescan reduce the raw linear tiff size by 1/2 effectively giving me a 3600ppi image. With a little sharpening even a 12"x15" image looked very clean and sharp without looking over sharpened. What I didn't like with the OpticFilm 8200i is that, with my model at least, the IR cleaning isn't effective at all. I have an open rma request to have that looked at now. ColorPerfect has many film profiles so as to help tweak the colors for just the right look from the given film. I guess it all depends upon how much work you want to do and how you want the end result to look. At least there are options. Btw flatbeds for 35mm can do the job but as others have said the results aren't likely to give you satisfying results at 8x10 sizes. Good luck!