gerber_van_der_graaf

<p>I am back in the playfield again. Rinsing the bottles and makeing a new solution from the kit that already was partly used, solved the problem: after developing a test strip, the slides show perfect colours. Fortunately I didn't have to throw away the half-used E-6 kit. Probably one of the bottles containing the solutions, I suspect the colour developer, was contaminated with some bleach fixer.</p>

<p>Hi Dan,<br /> Thanks for your thorough analyses. Your comments convince me that I will have to throw away the fresh baths (one week old), rinse the bottles severely (I always use the same ones for each bath) and make new solutions from the same kit (of which I still have half of the concentrates) to test a small strip of film. If processing will still fail, I will make new solutions from another, new, unopened E6 kit.<br /> Gerber</p>

<p> To end with a strip of Velvia 50 from the first batch. Watch the square in the third frame. The second time both Velvia 50 were completely transparent, including borders and lettering</p><div></div>

<p>And a piece of 120 film Provia 100F</p><div></div>

<p>A strip of Astia 100F</p><div></div>

<p>Here are some strips of film. Regarding the tears (35mm strip) and speckles (on one of the 120 films), it seems as if the dye has been dissolved at some places. Though, I also figured out that there is a small light leak between the lid of the JOBO drum and the core tube at which the spirals are placed on.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for your replies. A leak in the drum might be the cause, indeed. As I used two film spirals for 120 film and one for 35mm film. Which might have been a bit too much, though the lid of the drum seemed to close perfectly. I will check it out with some pieces of BW film. Gerber</p>

<p>Hi, <br /><br />Since a couple of years I am developing my own slides using the<br />Fujihunt E6 3-bath processing kit. Normally I get very good results.<br />But since the last two batches of 4 120 films and one 135 film (fresh<br />dilutions from the same package) the results are extremely poor: a thin<br />image as if it was several stops over-exposed (Kodak E100G), RVP 50<br />gives green/cyan, monochrome results, brownish colour cast (RDPIII),<br />or even nothing apears on the film, neither margins and lettering of<br />film type and frame numbers. The films were exposed in different<br />camera's (Rolleiflex GX and Leica M6), so I don't think its a failure<br />of the shutter.<br /><br />I diluted the concentrates of the Fujihunt processing kit in<br />de-ionized water (conductivity < 10 micro-seconcs cm), which I also<br />use for rinsing in order to prevent Calcium tags on the<br />film. I am using a JOBO CPP2 processor that keeps the temperature at 38 +/-<br />0.1 C. Processing times have been performed following the instructions,<br />i.e. 6 1/2 min first developer, 2 min rinsing (using de-ionized water<br />in three batches: first 30 s, second and third 1 min), 6 min colour<br />developer, 2 min rinsing, 6 min bleach fixer, 4 min rinsing (first<br />rinsing bath during 30 sec. second, third and fourth during 1 min).<br />I cannot find a date of storage live on the package. However, each<br />bottle has printed a different number. The only cause for this<br />failure I can imagine is that the storage temperature might have<br />exceeded 30C, which isn't allowed following instruction on the<br />package. Does anybody know if this might destroy the developers? Does<br />anbody have any other idea which may cause this failure?<br /><br />Thanks, Gerber</p>

<p>Why does such an excellent camera needs a backup?</p>

<p>Anyway, I'd choose for an other MP, probably with a different view finder magnification: then all buttons will work identic and the camera will have the samfeeling. This in contrast to a M6, of which the shutter dial goes the other way around. Using both cameras at once might be confusing during its usage. Actually, I prefer to a have the M6 just because of its shutter dial: its larger and more logical in combination with the meter indication in the viewer.</p>

<p>I am referring to auction number 220736467073 at eBay.com. Its highest offer so far is US $2.025,00</p>

<p>I agree $4000 is much too high for the 9000 ED. You will need a bit of patience when a better offer appears on the Internet. There is currently an auction of a Nikon 9000 ED at Fleebay. I really wonder if it will exceed $2300.</p>

<p>Even as a computer graduade it does not serve if you will have to deal with commercial software as you cannot adapt it to the newer Operating Systems (probably MS-Win), or there is a bug in the software, orit does not work how you'd like to. Have a look at the (currently at the frontpage of PN) thread concerning Vuescan to give an idea how you might become 'locked in''. The coolscan 8000 is working with the FOSS program Sane, so I'd go for that. The Coolscan 9000 seems to be a bit better as it has an (anti-aliasing?) filter. That's why I bought that one a few years ago. But unfortunately there is no FOSS driver, so its not supported by Sane. You also could take this opportunity with your computer skills: pick up a 9000 and develop a driver. Somebody already started to do so, but did not finish it. You can find this info on the Same forum. Though I am not experienced in driver development, I have some programming skills. I would be very pleased to collaborate in finishing a driver for the Nikon 9000 if you'd go for that way. The 9000 is a phantastic scanner, worth while to have a serious look at it.</p>

<p>Probably you are right: there might be a bug in the software. This might always be possible as programming is a tedious work, performed by human beings. Nobody can be blamed for that. As your problem concerns a commercial, closed source, program, only the manufacturer himself can check this and repair it. As long as you deal with commercial programs, you will _never_ have full control of the program and complete insight how the software deals with _your_ image data. These are the reasons I advertize Free (libre) Open Source Software whenever it is possible: theoretically, anybody can check and repair bugs, investigate how it works, extend it with new features when required. In other words: you have full control on the program: the software (and entire computer if all software is FOSS) is owned by you, not by the software manufature(s) who sold software licences, with all their conditions and restrictions. Unfortunately, the Epson V500 is not supported by the Sane project, probably because of missing Free and Open Source Software of the driver for your device. I recommend to insist to the manufacturer of the scanner to issue the protocols for writing a driver program or to issue the driver software under a FOSS licence. Actually, you paid for the device and it should be completely yours. At least that is my opinion. I am suprized that we, as photogs and consumers in general, just accept all these restrictions and continue buying scanners, cameras etc that hide its functioning. Selecting on this aspect when buying a new device will definitely change the manufacturers attitudes. Have a look at the smartphone market: Android versus Iphone, for example.</p>

<p>Having all said this, I'd also like to say that I agree with other posts here, Vuescan is a reasonable good program for scanning and the author is quite responsive when a problem occurs. The program is relatively cheap and one does not have to pay for upgrades or when moving out to other Operating Systems. I suggest to contact Hamrick directly. Please, let us know if he could help you.</p>

<p>While I mainly shoot 6x6 for landscapes and like this format very much, I also missed some panoramic format and the possibilities of a view camera. So I extended my equipment with a used Arca Swiss 6x9, which came with a 6x8 filmholder. I found the difference between 6x6 and 6x8 a bit too small and wanted even a bit more panoramic view. Also, I already owned a Durst 805 enlarger and wanted to exploit the maximum size 6x9 of the enlarger and the camera. So, I added a 6x9 filmholder (actually, two) and think it really was worth the money and efford.</p>

<p>I agree with previous posts: another enlarger up to this format can be obtained for a very reasonable prize. The only problem is to get rid of the old one, because they occupy quite a lot of space.</p>

<p>Hope this helped you a bit.</p>

<p>I bought the glassholder new after I bought a used LS 9000. The price I payed of the holder was approx 1/7 of the scanner. I think it is a very nice scanner that I hope to use for many years to come. IMHO the glassholder is definitely worth its value, regarding the improvement of image quality. Else, it wouldn't make sense to spend $ 1000,- on a good camera lens.<br /><br />I already mentioned before on this site and at other places: it is becoming a problem that Nikon does not provide the protocols for controlling this scanner. This problem will only grow in time until we, as photogs, will end up with an obsolete device. If Nikon would provide the driver protocols, driver software could be written for any program running on any Operating System, for now and in future, be it 32, 64 or more bits, MS-WINDOW, MAC, Linux, whatever will come. I am convinced that free driver software for film scanners is strongly required as people will still scan film for a very long time to come, while software and Operating Systems change rapidly and quickly become incompatible with existing software and driver programs. Also, I have the feeling that Nikon is not strongly interested in developing new scanners or maintaining the (driver) software for the existing ones.<br /><br />Recently I wrote Nikon asking to issue the protocol and / or the source code of the driver software for this scanner in order to use it in the SANE software. As an answer I only received an automatic reply containing some commercial. I never received a proper reply on my request, even though promised at their (Asian) website. Which indicates the lack of interest of Nikon towards its customers.<br /><br />Therefore I ask you, as user of the LS 9000, to contact Nikon and its representatives, and insist to publish the protocol and / or issue their driver software under a Free and Open Source (FOSS) license. So any software engineer can adapt and improve it to the needs that are required, now and in the future, and not depending on the will of an individual company.<br /><br />It just doesn't make sense for Nikon to keep the driver protocols for themselves: their market will not grow, on the contrary. It doesn't make sense for users of this device to run old computer architectures with obsolete software. It's up to you.</p>

<p>Seeing this post I am glad I still use my darkroom. Concerning B/W this seems much easier and photos seem to hold longer. Correct me if I am wrong. Really, I don't want to start an analog vs digital fight here or put a pun on digital. I know the drawbacks of film as well.</p>

<p>I am using the Coolscan 9000 now for two years and are quite happy with the scanner itself. What me worries is that the software is written for MS-WIN XP. Will the software that comes with the scanner also work with VISA and Win-7?</p>

<p>I would prefer to use a Free and Open Source Software program, like SANE, but the driver and protocols are not published by Nikon.</p>

<p>So I am asking (again!): Nikon please give the protocols for writing a driver program. So I (or other software developers) can use this amazing scanner for the coming decades, long after XP, or whatever OS, has gone.</p>

<p>I'd buy as much as possible different storage media and save money to upgrade hard-and software in the future in order to store/archive your photo's. This to guarantee your daughter will have photos of her childhood when she has grown up. Another way is to add a camera to shoot film. Just to minimize the effords of archiving. (Not intended as a pun to digitial or to start an endless digital-film discussion).</p>

<p>As I am only shooting film, 35mm and MF, I cannot compare image quality with top-rated digital gear. But to my feeling, colour slides are amazing good for large prints. Unfortunately laboraties for developing slides have mostly been disappeared in my area (Catalunya, Spain). So I decided to process E6 by myself as well: picked a JOBO processor and a 3-bath processing kit from Fuji. Actually, it turned out it is very easy to process slides and I cannot distingish the quality from the laboratories I received my slides in the past. In case you will change to film, it is worth to consider processing by yourself, apart that it is fun as well.</p>

<p>Maybe you changed the diafragma dial when the lens was off the camera. Turn the dial back as far as you can to the smallest diafragma (if I remember well) and then try to mount the lens again on the body.</p>

<p>Well Nikon, in case you are accidently reading this thread: please give free the source code of the driver programs and the communication protocols of the electronics you are manufacturing or have been manufacturing in the past. Even it will not increase instantly your profit, users will keep on enjoying your products now an in the future, even if your, or third-party, software has become obsolete or does not work properly anymore on whatsoever new Operating System. So it will give you more credits. </p>

<p>To be more specific: I am struggling already for a long time to get working the Nikon 9000 scanner working properly with the SANE project, which is Free and Opens Source Software supporting many scanners on different Operating Systems, among Linux.</p>

<p>So for god's sake, please give free the source code of the driver software and the communication protocols of your electronics. You won't loose anything, only credits by (aspirant) users of your products in case you won't. I'll pass to buy new electroncs that strongly depend on the use of the Computer if its drivers are closed source. Which includes the risk the device will be obsolete after two or three years, when again a new sloppy MS-WIN is issued and lacking the drivers I need.</p>

<p>I like to shoot landscapes with my Rolleiflex 6008 Integral 2, mostly on Velvia 50 or Provia 100. Unfortunately the gear is very bulky and heavy with several lenses. Also it demands some patience from my friends and family, especially when using the tripod. But the results are marvelous!<br>

As a lightweight alternative I use my Leica M6 TTL, but that's a complete different story of photographing.<br>

I process E6 by myelf as laboratories are disappearing and processing costs are rising. Besides, it is a lot of fun. Processing E6 is not too difficult when using a good temperature controller, like the Jobo processor and drum system. To me, film is the only way of photographing. So I hope it will stay for a while.</p>

<p>Hamrick´s Vuescan is closed software and therefore the drivers it uses are not free available. Probably Vuescan bought the driver from Nikon in some way.</p>

<p>I am a Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) addict. So here we go again: I am asking Nikon to publish the protocols for their scanners. So any skilled programmer will be able to write a driver for them, and maybe even better than Nikon can do and on any platform (there is more in life than Apple, Intel--386 and MS-WIN). These drivers than can be used, now and in the future, even when the scanners (or even Nikon itself) will have been discontinued and not supported anymore, by existing software (like OpenOffice, Gimp, Sane), or by any future software of which we don't have any idea now what will show off.</p>

<p>So, please, Nikon, give free your protocols for controlling your electronics. There is nothing to loose, only to win: namely more attraction of enthousiastic users (and programmers who will take a lot of cumbersome coding work out of your hands) and clients who do not want to be restiricted by program X running on OS Y during period Z.</p>

<p>Thank you very much in advance. In name of many (enthousiastic, future) users, among those of SANE:<br>

http://www.sane-project.org/<br>

Gerber</p>

<p>In contrast to FOSS, closed software does not give any insight or idea about the processing of our own images. Also, by using closed software one gives away the control of the device (ie computer and scanner) that belongs to you. Using FOSS gives back the control and generaties creativity.</p>

<p>I only shoot film for different reasons: I am not a professional shooter, not in a hurry to view my results directly after shooting and I am spending already too much time behind th computer screen for my work, which is not related to photography. Though also (colour) slides and photo´s often degenerate over time, it seems that film is still one of the best medium for long time storage. But, above all: I just like shooting on film and the processing in the darkroom. For posting on the web or emailing I scan the images.</p>

<p>I store my data only in free and open formats, like for images in PNG. Even if the format may change over time, you can probably always read the images that have been written into an older version of such a format. Because as once the information of the format is public, it will stay public forever. It is, so to say, sustainable. Eventually, a ´closed format´ image may currently be converted into an open format, but there is no guarantee it still can be read after a long period of storage time.</p>

<p>The same for the file system (no vfat, but ext2, ext3, reiserfs etc), the Operating System (Linux, OpenBSD, Hurd) as the software I am using for manipulating and storing the image (GIMP).</p>

<p>For data storage medium I currently am using writable CD/DVD´s and a second external HD. In the past I also used Magneto-Optic disks. These disks are used as a plain HD when connected to the computer (re-writable), but have a limited capacity (about 1 GB) and are rather slow. They use a combination of heat and a magnetic field to store/remove the data and seem to hold their data for quite a long period of time (30 to 50 years). It is a pity that these type of disks have never become more popular. Else, manufactures would have performed more efford to make larger and faster disks.</p>