Digital BW, The Print

I'm not consistantly getting good sharp scans. I cant establish a 
pattern to the behaviour. The negs are pin sharp through a loupe but 
scan soft. I know I have to apply sharpening after the scan but this 
is different. Some negs scan sharp and then just need that bit extra 
sharpening, and others are really really soft although they're 
actually sharp. 

I use Silverfast Ai 6.2.2 and have the little focus icon (looks like 
an enlarger) on so it shows bold and the 'crosshair' appears over the 
prescan image. The firmware is up to date.

Could the focus mechanism inside be loose or the autofocus be out of 
calibration ? Has anyone else had and solved this kind of problem? 
Anyone know how to make the adjustment ? I'm pretty handy and could 
take it on with a little instruction. Love to get an email from you - 
I'm tearing my hair out.

"frankg_photo" wrote:
> I'm not consistantly getting good sharp scans. 
> I use Silverfast Ai 6.2.2 and have the little focus icon (looks like 
> an enlarger) on so it shows bold and the 'crosshair' appears over the 
> prescan image. The firmware is up to date.

Is the film flat in the holder? I think with SilverFast the crosshair can be moved off center 
to change the focus point anywhere on the film. Might try setting the crosshair off center 
towards the corner by about 1/3rd.

Don't know if this works with the Sprintscan - it works with Nikon scanners.

> Is the film flat in the holder? I think with SilverFast the 
crosshair can be moved off center 
> to change the focus point anywhere on the film. Might try setting 
the crosshair off center 
> towards the corner by about 1/3rd.
> 
> Don't know if this works with the Sprintscan - it works with Nikon 
scanners.

I also forgot to mention in my original post that I also ave the 
glass film holder ( to hold film flat) and the results aren't any 
better

I also use  SS120 for my MF scans.  I am under the impression that 
Silverfast never instituted auto or manual focus for this scanner.  
When scanning with SF, the focus point is wherever the last focus was 
set by Polaroids Insight software.  So, what I do is always use 
Insight to scan "raw" followed by SF HDR to import into PS.

Regards.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "frankg_photo" 
<fh.gross@s...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Is the film flat in the holder? I think with SilverFast the 
> crosshair can be moved off center 
> > to change the focus point anywhere on the film. Might try setting 
> the crosshair off center 
> > towards the corner by about 1/3rd.
> > 
> > Don't know if this works with the Sprintscan - it works with 
Nikon 

> scanners.
> 
> I also forgot to mention in my original post that I also ave the 
> glass film holder ( to hold film flat) and the results aren't any 
> better

Shilesh,
For each scan you use 2 different scanner programs ? One for the 
focus and then SF ?
Wow this shouldn't be necessary - surely their focus button on/off 
should work - where did you hear that they never instituted focusing 
the scanner?
I will try Insight and see if the focus is different/better.
> 
> I also use  SS120 for my MF scans.  I am under the impression that 
> Silverfast never instituted auto or manual focus for this scanner.  
> When scanning with SF, the focus point is wherever the last focus 
was 
> set by Polaroids Insight software.  So, what I do is always use 
> Insight to scan "raw" followed by SF HDR to import into PS.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "frankg_photo" 
> <fh.gross@s...> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Is the film flat in the holder? I think with SilverFast the 
> > crosshair can be moved off center 
> > > to change the focus point anywhere on the film. Might try 
setting 

> > the crosshair off center 
> > > towards the corner by about 1/3rd.
> > > 
> > > Don't know if this works with the Sprintscan - it works with 
> Nikon 
> > scanners.
> > 
> > I also forgot to mention in my original post that I also ave the 
> > glass film holder ( to hold film flat) and the results aren't any 
> > better