Digital BW, The Print

Hi,
perhaps this is slightly OT.

However, we all have to face the task of keeping a database of our scan/digicam/printfiles and saving them to CD or DVD.

I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty backlog of scans and would be interested to know of any programs or methods that people have found worthwhile.

I'm only using MS Works Database, which I suspect will make life more difficult when searching for files.

At present I catalogue my files by year-month-date-neg.no. and have all my scan files on one set of CDs and the print files on another set. This way I can keep the scan files at a friend's house in case of fire etc.

Any tips on systems and software would be most appreciated.

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com

   "Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and 
   hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance and have 
   seen no occasion to change."
   --Frank Lloyd Wright

> From: Richard Smallfield [mailto:r.smallfield@...]
> 
> I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty backlog of 
> scans and would be interested to know of any programs or methods 
> that people have found worthwhile.

ThumbsPlus (www.cerious.com, Windows only)
iMatch (www.photools.com)

-- 

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

At 06:31 AM 2/15/04 +1300, you wrote:
>Hi,
>perhaps this is slightly OT.
>
>However, we all have to face the task of keeping a database of our 
>scan/digicam/printfiles and saving them to CD or DVD.
>
>I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty backlog of scans 
>and would be interested to know of any programs or methods that people 
>have found worthwhile.
>
>I'm only using MS Works Database, which I suspect will make life more 
>difficult when searching for files.
>
>At present I catalogue my files by year-month-date-neg.no. and have all my 
>scan files on one set of CDs and the print files on another set. This way 
>I can keep the scan files at a friend's house in case of fire etc.
>
>Any tips on systems and software would be most appreciated.
>
>thanks,
>Richard
>--
>http://smallfield.vze.com
>http://photos.smallfield.vze.com
>
>    "Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and
>    hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance and have
>    seen no occasion to change."
>    --Frank Lloyd Wright

Richard,

I use a super low-tech way.    It doesn't matter where you start numbering 
the CD's and it is open-ended. The directory files are TXT that can be read 
and changed in any word processor. When I fill a CD I make a txt directory 
that is key-word searchable.  For example you zero in with part of a file 
name or a date.  You can annotate the files in a word processor any way you 
want. I use Advanced Directory Printer for Windows available at share-ware 
sites.  The bottom line is the data is safe and doesn't need a special 
program to access it.

AZ

Richard, one thing to check is the ability of the catalog program to do
reliable backups.  I bought ACDSee v. 4, and after cataloging about 20 cd's
finally noticed there was no backup ability.  So, I upgraded to the version
that did have backup capability, but the files would not import.  So I
started over.  I'm using Cumulus v. 6.0 now, about $60 for a single license,
and happy as a little clam.  It's quick, and very flexible.  I search by
keywords, and in Cumulus you can either do a global search of all CD's by
keyword, or just select the keyword (category)and the images will be
instantly displayed.  

You may want to do some research on longevity of CD's and DVD's.  We are
going to optical storage at my firm (accounting, not photo....I wish) and
the word we are getting is that DVD's are inferior in terms of shelf life
after burning.  I use the Mitsui gold CD's, supposedly a 200-year life,
which to me means I stand a good chance of them lasting a few years until
the next big thing comes along.  As digital b&w printers, I see this as the
weakest link, especially as we may migrate to digital capture with no
negative to fall back on.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Smallfield [mailto:r.smallfield@...] 
> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 11:32 AM
> To: Digital BW Print
> Subject: [Digital BW] Cataloging digital print files
> 
> Hi,
> perhaps this is slightly OT.
> 
> However, we all have to face the task of keeping a database 
> of our scan/digicam/printfiles and saving them to CD or DVD.
> 
> I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty 
> backlog of scans and would be interested to know of any 
> programs or methods that people have found worthwhile.
> 
> I'm only using MS Works Database, which I suspect will make 
> life more difficult when searching for files.
> 
> At present I catalogue my files by year-month-date-neg.no. 
> and have all my scan files on one set of CDs and the print 
> files on another set. This way I can keep the scan files at a 
> friend's house in case of fire etc.
> 
> Any tips on systems and software would be most appreciated.
> 
> thanks,
> Richard
> --
> http://smallfield.vze.com
> http://photos.smallfield.vze.com
> 
>    "Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and 
>    hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance and have 
>    seen no occasion to change."
>    --Frank Lloyd Wright
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits 
> for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. 
> Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
> http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/ucIolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------~->
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or 
> you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership 
> preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier 
> messages to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks 
> or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be 
> removed from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of 
> digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic 
> posts may be removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group 
> rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and 
> decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See Group 
> Topic, Rules and Guidelines in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL 
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE 
> THAT THE OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, 
> INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF 
> PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN 
> IF THE  OWNER AND MODERATORS OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH 
> DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE 
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED 
> ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) 
> STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO 
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard 
Smallfield <r.smallfield@p...> wrote:
> Hi,
> perhaps this is slightly OT.
> 
> However, we all have to face the task of keeping a database of our 
scan/digicam/printfiles and saving them to CD or DVD.
> 
> I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty backlog of 
scans and would be interested to know of any programs or methods that 
people have found worthwhile.
> 
> I'm only using MS Works Database, which I suspect will make life 
more difficult when searching for files.
> 
> At present I catalogue my files by year-month-date-neg.no. and have 
all my scan files on one set of CDs and the print files on another 
set. This way I can keep the scan files at a friend's house in case 
of fire etc.
> 
> Any tips on systems and software would be most appreciated.
> 
> thanks,
> Richard

My vote would be for Imatch.  Powerful software but you can as much 
of it as you want.  In other words it'll grow with you.  Stable, 
reasonably priced and excellent support.  The support is right up 
there with Qimage.

Tom

> ThumbsPlus (www.cerious.com, Windows only)
> iMatch (www.photools.com)

Looks like iMatch is for Windows also. :-(

lara

Richard-

I agree with everyone else...Imatch is the way to go for the offline 
database app.

I also use Image AXS, an expensive "museum" program that lets you 
really add a lot of other information (if I ever learn all the 
capabilities of iMatch, it may be there, too) into templates that are 
preset but can be adapted...I use this to (now that I have iMatch) 
just to track PRINTS (sales, number series, etc).

I would also recommend sticking with some simple viewer app like 
ACDsee for quick viewing and leave all the others that have viewers 
to thier special function.

Believe it or not, I still print contact sheets and I like ACDsee the 
best for that.

There is also a yahoo group that supports iMatch and it is quite 
active.

cheers,

Tom O'Connell


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard 
Smallfield <r.smallfield@p...> wrote:
> Hi,
> perhaps this is slightly OT.
> 
> However, we all have to face the task of keeping a database of our 
scan/digicam/printfiles and saving them to CD or DVD.
> 
> I'm currently trying to get through cataloging a hefty backlog of 
scans and would be interested to know of any programs or methods that 
people have found worthwhile.
> 
> I'm only using MS Works Database, which I suspect will make life 
more difficult when searching for files.
> 
> At present I catalogue my files by year-month-date-neg.no. and have 
all my scan files on one set of CDs and the print files on another 
set. This way I can keep the scan files at a friend's house in case 
of fire etc.

> 
> Any tips on systems and software would be most appreciated.
> 
> thanks,
> Richard
> --
> http://smallfield.vze.com
> http://photos.smallfield.vze.com
> 
>    "Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and 
>    hypocritical humility. I chose honest arrogance and have 
>    seen no occasion to change."
>    --Frank Lloyd Wright

Hello

Would anyone happen to know where I might be able to download a scan 
of a 35mm B&W negative done with a Nikon CoolScan V at 4000dpi with 
optimum settings ?

I am trying to determine how much of an improvement in the final 
output to my Epson 1270 using MIS VM inks the CoolScan will make. I 
am currently using an Epson Perfection 1200 with the transparency 
adapter and scanning at 1200dpi. I am looking to improve 
sharpness/crispness and smoothness.

I realize that the CoolScan V is a  significant improvement over the 
Epson 1200 as far as capture goes but I am wondering just how much of 
an improvement I can expect in the final print considering I will 
more than likely have to correct for the grain at the cost of 
sharpness. I would also like to discover how much of a role the 
limitations of my Epson 1270 are playing and having a scan from the 
CoolScan would help with this a great deal.

To someone like me the $600. price tag on the Nikon CoolScan V is a 
whole lotta money. Before I invest this kind of money in a film 
scanner I really need to know just how much of an improvement I can 
expect in my final print.

I should also add that I currently use Genuine Fractals to enlarge my 
scans to 13x19 before printing and unless I discover a reason not to 
would probably do the same with the scans from the Nikon. So, I would 
be using the 4000dpi scan mode simply for getting the highest 
resolution scan without regard for enlarging.

I have investigated having a lab scan just one of my negatives and 
they wanted $40., and there are no rental facilities in my area.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Tim

I purchased a Nikon Coolscan V recently and I am
extremely happy.  I was using an Epson 2450 prior to
that, and I can tell you that the difference is very
significant when it comes to print quality!

Grain isn't a problem.


--- Tim Goodwin <tgvoz@...> wrote:
> Hello
> 
> Would anyone happen to know where I might be able to
> download a scan 
> of a 35mm B&W negative done with a Nikon CoolScan V
> at 4000dpi with 
> optimum settings ?
> 
> I am trying to determine how much of an improvement
> in the final 
> output to my Epson 1270 using MIS VM inks the
> CoolScan will make. I 
> am currently using an Epson Perfection 1200 with the
> transparency 
> adapter and scanning at 1200dpi. I am looking to
> improve 
> sharpness/crispness and smoothness.
> 
> I realize that the CoolScan V is a  significant
> improvement over the 
> Epson 1200 as far as capture goes but I am wondering
> just how much of 
> an improvement I can expect in the final print
> considering I will 
> more than likely have to correct for the grain at
> the cost of 
> sharpness. I would also like to discover how much of
> a role the 
> limitations of my Epson 1270 are playing and having
> a scan from the 
> CoolScan would help with this a great deal.
> 
> To someone like me the $600. price tag on the Nikon
> CoolScan V is a 
> whole lotta money. Before I invest this kind of
> money in a film 
> scanner I really need to know just how much of an
> improvement I can 
> expect in my final print.
> 
> I should also add that I currently use Genuine
> Fractals to enlarge my 
> scans to 13x19 before printing and unless I discover
> a reason not to 
> would probably do the same with the scans from the
> Nikon. So, I would 
> be using the 4000dpi scan mode simply for getting
> the highest 
> resolution scan without regard for enlarging.
> 
> I have investigated having a lab scan just one of my
> negatives and 
> they wanted $40., and there are no rental facilities
> in my area.
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks
> Tim
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tim 
Goodwin <tgvoz@p...> wrote:

> I should also add that I currently use Genuine Fractals to
> enlarge my scans to 13x19 before printing and unless I
> discover a reason not to would probably do the same with the
> scans from the Nikon. So, I would be using the 4000dpi scan
> mode simply for getting the highest resolution scan without 
> regard for enlarging.

One of my reasons for choosing Minolta's 5400 for my scanning 
work several months back (in spite of already hearing rumors of 
Nikon's revamped line being on its way) was the prospect of 
largely, if not entirely, eliminating "interpolate" from my
day-to-day work regimen, as I strongly feel that *no* interpolation 
beats any form of interpolation, whichever algorithm one 
chooses. So far I think I've largely accomplished this, and have 
been happy with the results.  This is not to say the Nikon can't  
do the job for you, and do it well.

 
> I have investigated having a lab scan just one of my negatives
> and they wanted $40., and there are no rental facilities in my
> area.

Such an investigation often tends to put the cost of a decent film 
scanner in its proper perspective, IMO. ;-)

- Barrett

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Barrett Benton" 
<bwbenton@b...> wrote:

> One of my reasons for choosing Minolta's 5400 for my scanning 
> work several months back (in spite of already hearing rumors of 
> Nikon's revamped line being on its way) was the prospect of 
> largely, if not entirely, eliminating "interpolate" from my
> day-to-day work regimen, as I strongly feel that *no* interpolation 
> beats any form of interpolation, whichever algorithm one 
> chooses. So far I think I've largely accomplished this, and have 
> been happy with the results.  This is not to say the Nikon can't  
> do the job for you, and do it well.
> 

Chasseur d'Images magazine recently (Dec 2003) had a review and 
comparison of the newer Nikon Coolscan scanners (5000 and V) with the 
Minolta 5400.

The Minolta 5400 has the highest input resolution but in terms of 
pratical resolution its about equal to the new Nikon scanners. 
This is consistent with what we are seeing with a lot of scanners. 

The Epson 3200 has an input resolution of 3200dpi but its real 
resolution is around 1800dpi. And the Nikon 8000 real's resolution is 
around 2895 dpi according to tests available on the scannerforum. 
http://www.scannerforum.com/

So it seems that the Coolscan 5000 and V can now match the Minolta 
5400 size for size in term of output.

The Minolta 5400 has a tendency to go magenta (noise?) in the shadows 
and for b&w negatives it has more contrast than the new Nikon 
scanners with the result that some highlights may be blown. This 
could be corrected if Minolta offered an upgrade to its exising 
software. The Nikon Coolscan b&w scanned images demand more post-
processing since they appear softer in term of contrast (shadows and 
highlights being preserved), but not in terms of resolution or 
sharpness.

It also was noted that the new Coolscan software has been 
significantly improved. Both scanners are now faster than the Minolta 
5400, Firewire 400 version included; the difference is staggering 
when ICE is activated.

Cheers,
Andre











They noted that the Minolta has a tendency to go magenta in the 
shadows. Its b&w scans have more contrast than the Nikons but also 
have a t

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
"sceptre12345" <am1000@v...> wrote:

> Chasseur d'Images magazine recently (Dec 2003) had a
> review and comparison of the newer Nikon Coolscan
> scanners (5000 and V) with the Minolta 5400.
> 
> The Minolta 5400 has the highest input resolution but in terms
> of  pratical resolution its about equal to the new Nikon
> scanners. This is consistent with what we are seeing with a lot 
> of scanners. 

Up to a given print output size, this is of course an arguable point 
either way. My concern is with larger print size (above 13x19").  
My side-by-side comparison, admittedly, was with a late-model 
Polaroid SprintScan 4000, where the difference was tangible, 
albeit not earth-shattering.  The Nikon V/5000, no doubt, is 
better-spec'd all-around than this.
 
> The Epson 3200 has an input resolution of 3200dpi but its real 
> resolution is around 1800dpi. And the Nikon 8000 real's
> resolution is around 2895 dpi according to tests available on
> the scannerforum. http://www.scannerforum.com/

I've wondered about the 3200 in this respect, and also wonder 
how this would relate to the newest Model in the lineup.
 
> So it seems that the Coolscan 5000 and V can now match the
> Minolta 5400 size for size in term of output.

Again, this may depend on desires print size.  How large did they 
go in their comparison?

 
> The Minolta 5400 has a tendency to go magenta (noise?) in 
> the shadows and for b&w negatives it has more contrast than
> the new Nikon scanners with the result that some highlights
> may be blown. This could be corrected if Minolta offered an
> upgrade to its exising software. The Nikon Coolscan b&w
> scanned images demand more post-processing since they
> appear softer in term of contrast (shadows and highlights
> being preserved), but not in terms of resolution or sharpness.

Merely anecdotal on my end, but I haven't had any noise or 
color-shift issues thus far with the 5400, save for a brief problem 
on a RAM- and processor-challenged system the first week I 
had the scanner (a somewhat souped-up Power Mac 7600, 
which was slated for upgrading anyway); a brief move to a blue 
and white G3 cleared everything up, and my current G4 simply 
gave the whole pakage a nice speed boost.  

> It also was noted that the new Coolscan software has been 
> significantly improved. Both scanners are now faster than the
> Minolta 5400, Firewire 400 version included; the difference is
> staggering when ICE is activated.

Can't argue that, although I'll say the scan speeds I observe with 
the 5400 - all bells and whistles engaged - is about average.  
Nikon appears to hold the speed record in this regard. :-)

- Barrett