mark_druziak

<p>Almost any image processing you do in SilverFast will add some time. One of the things that I think takes a lot of time is rotation of the image. I believe Lasersoft Imaging is working on some efficiency improvements for the next release.</p>

<p>Vincent, refresh my memory about the alignment issues again? If I remember, you can't align the movable frames on the holder with the frames on the film? Can you send some photos of your issue to markdruziak >at< plustek dot com? I apologize if you have done this already. I don't have access to my work email right now. Also, what country are you in? I can try to get you some film holders. We will eventually sell them separately.</p>

 

<p>Storm, the next release of SilverFast will have a fix for the Workflow Pilot and from what I understand an alternative method to using the Overview dialog.</p>

<p>Regarding support.... it's best to contact Plustek and SilverFast directly thru our websites. I don't always monitor these threads. Also please feel free to contact me directly via my Plustek email address, but please also log a call via the websites.</p>

<p>I suggest you go to Silverfast.com and log a call. They can log into your computer via Teamviewer and see what is going on. The problem you mention about prescanning the first frame was supposedly corrected in SilverFast 8 R22. If you get into this situation, the only way out of it that I know of is to Select the Service Dialog from the opening splash screen and then select Software Reset. But as I mentioned, I is important to report your problem to SilverFast.</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=7591465">T. Storm Halvorsen</a>, try this: <a href="http://plustekusa.blogspot.com/2013/01/plustek-opticfilm-120-quick-start-your.html">http://plustekusa.blogspot.com/2013/01/plustek-opticfilm-120-quick-start-your.html</a></p>

 

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=7591465" rel="nofollow">T. Storm Halvorsen</a> If you want, you can go to https://www.silverfast.com/problemreport/en.html?filter=assistant&sub=sales and then click on My Computer Doesn't Have A CD/DVD Drive.</p>

<p>Follow the instructions on the screen. </p>

<p>Drop me a note if you need more help.</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=7591465">T. Storm Halvorsen</a> Please send me your contact information: markdruziak >at< plustek {dot} com We will resolve this for you.</p>

 

<p>I just want to add my experience on viewing images scanned with this scanner. Either the file size or scanning at or above 5300 dpi confuses the default Windows and OSX photo viewers sometimes. I have had people tell me the same image that looks great on my computer looks out of focus or fuzzy on their computer. In all cases they were using the default viewer. I don't think this happens 100% of the time but it does happen some of the time. I asked the people that were reporting fuzzy images to open the same image in either Lightroom, PS or use the Picasa viewer. Using these programs made the image look as it should. All I'm saying here is that if you look at some of the full resolution images and they do not look good to you, don't panic. Try using one of the viewers I mentioned.</p>

Actually I think we are all right here. I had a discussion

with my contact at Lasersoft that confirms Rishi'point.

<p>Chris, thanks for your explanation. As soon as I posted my response I thought: "Yeah but Kodak 'red' isn't the same as Fuji 'red'."</p>

 

<p>Vincent, thanks for posting your experiences. Regarding the calibration... I may be mistaken about this from a recent conversation with a Lasersoft employee, the calibration adjusts the ICC profile of the scanner. The target is measured at Lasersoft in their lab. When doing the calibration on the scanner, the target is measured by the scanner and compared to the original calibration file. Notice the serial number on the bottom of the target. So the film base or emulsion doesn't really matter that much. It's the same idea as building a profile for your printer or calibrating your monitor. By the way, the scanner is shipped with a standard profile built in. Many times that is good enough. I will talk to the Lasersoft people over the next few days and confirm the calibration stuff and post what I find.</p>

<p>Yes we have a detailed review plan, but we need to fill our pre-orders first. Some people have had orders in for a long time.</p>

<p>Vincent, let me know how the scanner works out for you. If you have any questions/suggestions, please drop me an email: markdruziak )at( plustek dot com. This scanner is manufactured at our plant in Taiwan. It is closer to our development and product management team so they can see first hand what is happening on the assembly line. They can also react faster to questions and issues.</p>

 

<p>Thanks Bernard. I appreciate your support!</p>

<p>Just a little background info on those test results. I was a little surprised that my results for the OpticFilm 7600i were as high as they were so I went back and retested the resolution a couple more times. My conclusion was that maybe the scanner I had was on the high end of the resolution bell curve distribution. Or maybe the one the Filmscanner.info was a little to the left of the distribution curve. Or both. So I reported it as I saw it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>There are two different holders for 35mm. One is for film the other is for slides. However, you can scan unmounted slides in the 35mm film holder if you want. The design of the 35mm film holder is the same as the 120 holders. Each frame is supported on all four sides and the top frame is held in place magnetically.</p>

<p>No autofocus. The holders are very rigid and robust. I forget the actual thickness of the frame but I think it is like 1/4". The optics are designed with a depth of focus to accomodate any variations in the film surface that isn't removed by the holder. So far in testing by LaserSoft and Plustek, there haven't been any problems with image sharpness caused by the lack of autofocus.</p>

<p>That is a monochrome scanner. I'm not trying to put down the competition (I work for Plustek) but the resolution of that scanner is listed as 3200 dpi and it is monochrome. If the listed resolution is 3200, the actual resolution is less than that. Dmax of 4.7? Maybe but they don't specify Dmin so we don' really know what the dynamic range is. Our spec on the OpticFilm 120 is a measured dynamic range number. I actually saw the Microtek scanner yesterday and it looks like a good alternative for a doctor's office looking for a lower cost xray scanner. </p>

<p>As far as the OpticFilm 120 goes, you can find more info at the following two links:<br>

http://plustek.com/usa/products/opticfilm-series/opticfilm-120/<br>

http://plustekusa.blogspot.com/2012/10/plustek-opticfilm-120-frequently-asked.html<br>

Or you can send me an email: markdruziak at plustek dot com or even call me! 562-650-3900 (EST)</p>

<p>Greg, that is part of the plan to have the OpticFilm 120 added to the SilverFast test report. As far as the specs go, we are just trying to be honest with them. Yes the 4.8 number is a theoretical number and hopefully we updated all of the literature to clearly state that. The 4.01 number is one that was provided by LaserSoft as part of their testing. If this number changes either up or down, we will again update the literature and also add the non ME dynamic range. I also agree that there are a lot more than specs that contribute to image quality and workflow.</p>

<p>We are in a bit of a delay and I apologize for this. I put an announcement on the Plustek Facebook page and in the Media section on Plustek.com http://plustek.com/usa/news/. I'll post updates in both of these locations as soon as I have more to post.</p>

<p>I apologize for this delay. Scanners were delivered to Plustek offices in the US and Germany this week. I have been doing some testing and I'll post results on our Facebook page and our blog for those of you without Facebook. I am going to be on the road most of October so I really wont get to post tons of samples (or frequently update this forum), but hopefully there will be enough to give you an idea of what the scanner can do. I don't think SilverFast will mention the scanner until their software for the OpticFilm 120 is available for download. The dynamic range question will be answered but to do it right now would take resources away from launching the scanner and cause a further delay. If you have specific questions please feel free to send me an email: markdruziak at plustek dot com. Thanks for your understanding.</p>

<p>Wolf, I don't know the answer to that question. Give me some time to talk to the R&D team to see what measurements were done. </p>

<p>Boy it's hard to hide stuff from you guys! That is for our channel and retail partners. But there are no secrets in it so feel free to have a look.</p>

<p>Alan, Mark from Plustek here. If you purchased your scanner in the last 12 months you can upgrade to Silverfast 8 free of charge. Go to the Silverfast website for details: https://www.silverfast.com/get_update/en.html</p>

 

<p>Hi Mark from Plustek here. The Noritsu and Kodak scanners were built for commercial labs. I'm not sure of the image quality will be much different than the OpticFilm 120 but I'm sure they can image many more images per hour than the OpticFilm 120.</p>

<p>Recently our partner LaserSoft imaging sent me scans of USAF 1951 targets scanned with the OpticFilm 120. The OpticFilm 120 gave a higher resolution (5300 dpi) than scans of the same target scanned with the 9000 that were published on the web. </p>

<p>But of course, there is a lot more to image quality than measured resolution and dynamic range values. I have seen very poor images from Noritsu scanners and I have seen very good images from Noritsu scanners. As with most scanners, the operator makes a huge difference to the final out come.</p>

 

<p>Here is our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Plustek-Technology/169691449783876<br>

Yes the scanner will be in the Plustek booth at Photokina: Hall 3 Booth 13A</p>

Toni, I'm not so sure how valuable my update is, but thanks for the kind words.

 

Antti, the scanner has fixed focus, but the holders are patent pending to hold the film flat. There are some photos on our

Facebook page that show the holders.