Digital BW, The Print

Hello,

Thank you to those of ou who responded to my previous questions as to the merits of 
various film scanners. 

I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black and white negs.

As Im just getting started with this process, I'd love to hear about your workflows if you 
are doing these same things. What settings should I start with? any problems Im likely to 
encounter etc etc.

Thank you, 

Ben Zlotkin  - ben@...

Just be sure to scan in 16 bit.

On Mar 8, 2005, at 10:45 AM, ben_zlotkin wrote:

>
>  Hello,
>
>  Thank you to those of ou who responded to my previous questions as to 
> the merits of
>  various film scanners.
>
>  I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black 
> and white negs.
>
>  As Im just getting started with this process, I'd love to hear about 
> your workflows if you
>  are doing these same things. What settings should I start with? any 
> problems Im likely to
>  encounter etc etc.
>
>  Thank you,
>
>  Ben Zlotkin� - ben@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <22305_0205_016_b_300250_a.gif>
> <l.gif>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> 	� 	To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
> �
> 	� 	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> �
> 	� 	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
> Service.
>
>  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ben_zlotkin" 
<ben@b...> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Thank you to those of ou who responded to my previous questions as 
to the merits of 
> various film scanners. 
> 
> I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black 
and white negs.
> 
 Hi-Ben-
I bought a Polaroid scanner a few years back that was made by 
Microtech and you may have the same unit. I used the packaged 
Polaroid scan program and 9 times out of 10 the Auto mode was 
perfect-good histograms etc...It did have a power failure which I 
later learned was a known issue..after a 500.00 repair (out of 
warranty) the tech write up mentioned that the focus was incorrect 
and had been adjusted. This is an internal adjustment so i suspect 
it was shipped poorly adjusted. Any way my scans are MUCH sharper 
than before. Your machine should be very sharp as well- if it isn't 
it may need to be tuned up. Make sure you are still in warranty as 
it is very expensive to service these things.
Also as far as work flow - I think you are better off doing all 
adjustments in Photoshop-"grainyness" is more apparent if you make 
your adjustments in the prescan settings when compared to PS.
Jack

-I scan B&W film on a Microtek 120tf exclusively. I have found the
best workflow for me  is 
to scan in HDR mode in Silverfast 6 ai at close to 4000 dpi. For 645
I have a file size of just 
over 100 mp for a grayscale image. From there I bring  it  into
Siverfast HDR and do my 
major editing. If  you haven`t used Siverfast  it may take a bit of
time to get used to it, but 
once you do it`s a very good program. You can do your major editing
(levels, curves, size) 
in 16 bit mode from the raw file. You can also save your settings in
Silverfast HDR. Very 
conveniant if you want  to make adjustments or resizing later. There
are other ways of 
doing things but this works for me.  It fast and  it`s easy to go
back  to the original raw 
file without having to rescan. 
Alan


-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jnhugo"
<jacknadelle@h...> 
wrote:
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ben_zlotkin" 
> <ben@b...> wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Thank you to those of ou who responded to my previous questions
as 
> to the merits of 
> > various film scanners. 
> > 
> > I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5
black 

> and white negs.
> > 
>  Hi-Ben-
> I bought a Polaroid scanner a few years back that was made by 
> Microtech and you may have the same unit. I used the packaged 
> Polaroid scan program and 9 times out of 10 the Auto mode was 
> perfect-good histograms etc...It did have a power failure which I 
> later learned was a known issue..after a 500.00 repair (out of 
> warranty) the tech write up mentioned that the focus was incorrect 
> and had been adjusted. This is an internal adjustment so i suspect 
> it was shipped poorly adjusted. Any way my scans are MUCH sharper 
> than before. Your machine should be very sharp as well- if it isn't 
> it may need to be tuned up. Make sure you are still in warranty as 
> it is very expensive to service these things.
> Also as far as work flow - I think you are better off doing all 
> adjustments in Photoshop-"grainyness" is more apparent if you make 
> your adjustments in the prescan settings when compared to PS.
> Jack

On 3/8/05 8:45 AM, "ben_zlotkin" sent the following verbage:

> 
> I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black and white
> negs.
> 
> As Im just getting started with this process, I'd love to hear about your
> workflows if you 
> are doing these same things. What settings should I start with? any problems
> Im likely to 
> encounter etc etc.

Hi Ben.. I scan with silverfast 6 16bit RAW, zero out the highlight offset,
set the shadow offset to 100, uncheck auto Contrast, positive. Then take it
into Silverfast HDR for processing, I use positive settings here as well, to
avoid the negfix interpretation. 16bit, no sharpening. Keep the entire
histo, don't clip the ends.. and I stay away from most things auto for
anything scanner related. If you choose to do an auto exposure in HDR. Bring
your bonding box in enough that the neg frame is not part of the histo,
watch the contrast setting in the options, I uncheck it.. I find much more
control for fine tuning in PS.

I don't personally like the Microtek software.

Also, it's worth investing in the glass film holder. I clean the film with
Anchor film kleen, the glass with a little warm water, using webril wipes...
then give the glass and the film a good blast of dust off.

Best of Luck,
Carolyn

On my 120tf I have to scan as 48 bit and then extract one of the 
channels to get a sharp scan. A 16bit scan is a composite of all three 
channels and I often get blurry wavelike patterns throughout the image 
that way. I've heard many other users who's scanners have the same 
problem, but I think it varies from scanner to scanner so you might be 
lucky and get one that doesn't.

I use Silverfast. The Microtek software tends to crash a lot, and 
Vuescan just doesn't work well at all with this scanner.

I don't like the negfix profiles. They're too contrasty and seldom match 
the actual image they way I want them to. I dont like to work in HDR 
mode either, as I like to see the image I'm scanning as a positive. Most 
of the time I just choose a profile that lets me capture a full tonal 
range with no clipping at either end and do the rest of the work in 
Photoshop.

The glass holder is essential to get sharp scans, even for 35mm. But 
it's poorly built. The six plastic bits that hold the top part of the 
film holder to the bottom part break real easily, and I've had to 
replace five of mine already.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

> I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black and white negs.
> 
> As Im just getting started with this process, I'd love to hear about your workflows if you 
> are doing these same things. What settings should I start with? any problems Im likely to 
> encounter etc etc.

Carolyn Frayn wrote:

>
>. Bring
>your bonding box in enough that the neg frame is not part of the histo,
>watch the contrast setting in the options, I uncheck it.. 
>
With Vuescan you can select border / buffer functions where it will not 
measure for the exposure so the crop can get beyond the frame but 
doesn't count the unexposed part. At least that works with the Nikon 
8000 and the Epson 3200 that I have.

Ernst

On 3/9/05 10:04 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" sent the following verbage:

> 
> Carolyn Frayn wrote:
> 
>> 
>> . Bring
>> your bonding box in enough that the neg frame is not part of the histo,
>> watch the contrast setting in the options, I uncheck it..
>> 
> With Vuescan you can select border / buffer functions where it will not
> measure for the exposure so the crop can get beyond the frame but
> doesn't count the unexposed part. At least that works with the Nikon
> 8000 and the Epson 3200 that I have.

Hi Ernst.. I haven't had any luck with Vuescan on the microtek 120, it
either simply doesn't work, or I get horrendous lengths of pixel errors
throughout the scan. I upgraded to the "pro" edition (I think it's called),
but that didn't help.

In HDR, after I bring in the selection and then do my tonal corrections, I
take it back out again to process to keep the frame in the file.

Thanks,
Carolyn

> Hi Ernst.. I haven't had any luck with Vuescan on the microtek 120, it
> either simply doesn't work, or I get horrendous lengths of pixel errors
> throughout the scan. I upgraded to the "pro" edition (I think it's called),
> but that didn't help.

With the last version it also tried to pull the film holder further into 
the scanner than physically possible. I heard loud bangs and clicks from 
the scanner as it was desperatly trying to pull the film holder further 
inside. I pulled the plug on it in a hurry and fortunately nothing was 
damaged.

Vuescan is definitely not recommended for this scanner!

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

i use silverfast 6 with this scanner - usually very satisfying 
results, with colour negative scans sometimes i get weird colours, 
which have to be treated in ps

andreas hub

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> > Hi Ernst.. I haven't had any luck with Vuescan on the microtek 
120, it
> > either simply doesn't work, or I get horrendous lengths of pixel 
errors
> > throughout the scan. I upgraded to the "pro" edition (I think 
it's called),
> > but that didn't help.
> 
> With the last version it also tried to pull the film holder 
further into 
> the scanner than physically possible. I heard loud bangs and 
clicks from 
> the scanner as it was desperatly trying to pull the film holder 
further 
> inside. I pulled the plug on it in a hurry and fortunately nothing 
was 

> damaged.
> 
> Vuescan is definitely not recommended for this scanner!
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

Daniel Staver wrote:

>>Hi Ernst.. I haven't had any luck with Vuescan on the microtek 120, it
>>either simply doesn't work, or I get horrendous lengths of pixel errors
>>throughout the scan. I upgraded to the "pro" edition (I think it's called),
>>but that didn't help.
>>    
>>
>
>With the last version it also tried to pull the film holder further into 
>the scanner than physically possible. I heard loud bangs and clicks from 
>the scanner as it was desperatly trying to pull the film holder further 
>inside. I pulled the plug on it in a hurry and fortunately nothing was 
>damaged.
>
>Vuescan is definitely not recommended for this scanner!
>
>--
>Daniel Staver
>http://daniel.staver.no
>
>  
>
That's something you should report to Ed Hamrick. Hardware limits should 
be at the top to control before drivers are launched and I'm 
disappointed that this could happen. Have not had similar issues with my 
scanners though.

Ernst

I use a Photoshop plugin called NegPos. In many cases it gives me the 
best colors from negative film by far compared to any other conversion 
method I've tried. It's important to feed the plugin a 16bit raw 
uncorrected positive scan. Otherwise it won't work properly. A HDR file 
from Silverfast works really well for this.

http://www.c-f-systems.com/PhotoMathDocs.html
http://www.c-f-systems.com/Docs/NegPos101.zip
http://www.c-f-systems.com/Docs/NegPosNotes.htm

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

> i use silverfast 6 with this scanner - usually very satisfying 
> results, with colour negative scans sometimes i get weird colours, 
> which have to be treated in ps

Daniel Staver wrote:

>I use a Photoshop plugin called NegPos. In many cases it gives me the 
>best colors from negative film by far compared to any other conversion 
>method I've tried. It's important to feed the plugin a 16bit raw 
>uncorrected positive scan. Otherwise it won't work properly. A HDR file 
>from Silverfast works really well for this.
>
>http://www.c-f-systems.com/PhotoMathDocs.html
>http://www.c-f-systems.com/Docs/NegPos101.zip
>http://www.c-f-systems.com/Docs/NegPosNotes.htm
>
>--
>Daniel Staver
>http://daniel.staver.no
>
>  
>
Vuescan uses a different exposure per RGB channel to handle the color 
negative's orange mask. The green exposure time is 2.5x and the blue 
exposure time is 3.5x to the red exposure time. Sounds like a sensible 
approach that isn't used when the negative is scanned as a positive. Any 
comments on that in the Docs cited ?

Ernst

> Vuescan uses a different exposure per RGB channel to handle the color 
> negative's orange mask. The green exposure time is 2.5x and the blue 
> exposure time is 3.5x to the red exposure time. Sounds like a sensible 
> approach that isn't used when the negative is scanned as a positive. Any 
> comments on that in the Docs cited ?

Not that I know, but I haven't read the docs very carefully either. I 
just installed the plugin and really liked the results.

I remember being less than happy with the colors from Vuescan with the 
Minolta 5400 scanner I had before.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

> That's something you should report to Ed Hamrick. Hardware limits should 
> be at the top to control before drivers are launched and I'm 
> disappointed that this could happen. Have not had similar issues with my 
> scanners though.

He'll probably want a debug log to research the issue, but now I'm 
reluctant to run Vuescan again, even for debugging. I used Vuescan for 
all my scanning for over two years with my previous scanners, and would 
have loved to use it with my 120tf too.

I'll send an email to Ed and see if anything can be done.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

On Thursday, Mar 10, 2005, at 02:38 US/Eastern, hublaif wrote:

>
> i use silverfast 6 with this scanner - usually very satisfying
> results

Two weeks ago, I purchased SILVERFAST 6 AI from Lasersoft Imaging in 
Longboat Key, Florida.  Upon reading the E-manual, I had found that 
there were nine blank pages by the time I had read the manual halfway.  
I have sent 5 emails to LASERSOFT IMAGING (both in Florida & in 
Germany)  asking them if I am missing information...(it seems strange 
that there are so many blank pages just halfway thru the 
manual...)...they have NOT replied to any of my  requests for 
information...is this "normal customer support" from LASERSOFT IMAGING? 
  Have others had this "lack of support?"

Thank you.

terry


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Try the support forum on their web-site. They are moderately active 
there, although issues that they've been notified about a long time ago 
still remain unresolved.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

> Two weeks ago, I purchased SILVERFAST 6 AI from Lasersoft Imaging in 
> Longboat Key, Florida.  Upon reading the E-manual, I had found that 
> there were nine blank pages by the time I had read the manual halfway.  
> I have sent 5 emails to LASERSOFT IMAGING (both in Florida & in 
> Germany)  asking them if I am missing information...(it seems strange 
> that there are so many blank pages just halfway thru the 
> manual...)...they have NOT replied to any of my  requests for 
> information...is this "normal customer support" from LASERSOFT IMAGING? 
>   Have others had this "lack of support?"

> That's something you should report to Ed Hamrick. Hardware limits should 
> be at the top to control before drivers are launched and I'm 
> disappointed that this could happen. Have not had similar issues with my 
> scanners though.

I just got an email from Ed. This is a known problem and the glass 
holder does not work with Vuescan right now. He hopes to fix that soon.

The other film holders work fine. I just tested the 35mm holder and it 
works really well. Of course, film flatness and depth of field is a 
problem with this scanner - even with 35mm film. So the scan wasn't 
entirely sharp across the entire film area.

He's also added a 'Make gray from... (red/green/blue)' option to the 
software since last time I checked. This is really nice as a composite 
of all channels often results in very poor quality with the 120tf. This 
way I won't have to save a 48bit RGB and then extract one of the 
channels myself.

Once he fixes the glass holder support I'll once again be a loyal 
Vuescan user. I just like the interface so much better than Silverfast.

While writing this he sent me another email to let me know he might have 
a test version ready for me today already. Now that's good support!

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Terry - FWIW, I have found that things are really hit or miss with
LaserSoft.  Sometimes I've reached a human on their phone line who has been
very helpful and direct, and at other times I've had no response.  Maybe
they have a generous vacation/lunch/coffee break policy...

What works best with the Minolta 5400?

I have only 35mm film to scan. On a Mac, with which I've heard the 
Nikon scanners don't work very well. So I thought I'd get a 5400 and 
maybe buy LaserSoft SilverFast software to use with it, if that would 
help.

Should a Mac user who is willing to pay a premium for better 35mm 
scans instead consider getting a Microtek 120 to get better 35mm 
scans?

Thanks.
--
Sam


At 3:31 PM +0100 3/10/05, Daniel Staver wrote:

>  > Vuescan uses a different exposure per RGB channel to handle the color
>>  negative's orange mask. The green exposure time is 2.5x and the blue
>>  exposure time is 3.5x to the red exposure time. Sounds like a sensible
>>  approach that isn't used when the negative is scanned as a positive. Any
>>  comments on that in the Docs cited ?
>
>Not that I know, but I haven't read the docs very carefully either. I
>just installed the plugin and really liked the results.
>
>I remember being less than happy with the colors from Vuescan with the
>Minolta 5400 scanner I had before.
>
>--
>Daniel Staver
>http://daniel.staver.no

Daniel Staver wrote:

>>That's something you should report to Ed Hamrick. Hardware limits should 
>>be at the top to control before drivers are launched and I'm 
>>disappointed that this could happen. Have not had similar issues with my 
>>scanners though.
>>    
>>
>
>I just got an email from Ed. This is a known problem and the glass 
>holder does not work with Vuescan right now. He hopes to fix that soon.
>
>  
>
Good news.
I asked him several things last week among them to add the Grey Lab and 
RGB Lab space profiles of QTR to Vuescan but it will not happen.
Well scanning at 16 bit and assigning 2.2 Gamma to the Tiff and 
converting that to Grey Lab in PSCS will not change much in the data 
anyway but it is a bit less elegant. The other question was for an extra 
code for the Nikon 8000 wet mount carrier so I can get the maximum area 
possible in one scan on the 8000, it is however hardcoded in the 
firmware of the scanner so I can forget that.

>The other film holders work fine. I just tested the 35mm holder and it 
>works really well. Of course, film flatness and depth of field is a 
>problem with this scanner - even with 35mm film. So the scan wasn't 
>entirely sharp across the entire film area.
>  
>
It needs a wet mount carrier then like I have made for the Nikon 8000.  
Never had a 120tf carrier in my hands so can't judge whether it is possible.

>He's also added a 'Make gray from... (red/green/blue)' option to the 
>software since last time I checked. This is really nice as a composite 
>of all channels often results in very poor quality with the 120tf. This 
>way I won't have to save a 48bit RGB and then extract one of the 
>channels myself.
>  
>
>Once he fixes the glass holder support I'll once again be a loyal 
>Vuescan user. I just like the interface so much better than Silverfast.
>
>While writing this he sent me another email to let me know he might have 
>a test version ready for me today already. Now that's good support!
>  
>
There are risks to buy software from a one man shop but in my experience 
the advantages outweigh them multiple times. That was so when I started 
using a niche computer system 15 years ago (Risc Os on Acorn machines) 
and it still is with people like Ed, Qimage Mike, QTR Roy, etc.

Ernst

> Good news.
> I asked him several things last week among them to add the Grey Lab and 
> RGB Lab space profiles of QTR to Vuescan but it will not happen.
> Well scanning at 16 bit and assigning 2.2 Gamma to the Tiff and 
> converting that to Grey Lab in PSCS will not change much in the data 
> anyway but it is a bit less elegant. The other question was for an extra 
> code for the Nikon 8000 wet mount carrier so I can get the maximum area 
> possible in one scan on the 8000, it is however hardcoded in the 
> firmware of the scanner so I can forget that.

He already fixed the glass holder ten minutes ago.

But now there's some problems with Vuescan recognizing the entire 
preview area. I can't reach the last (rightmost) frame of a 35mm strip 
placed on the glass holder. I'm hoping he'll fix that too.

I had a look inside my 120tf once. I noticed that the way the hardware 
was designed it would be impossible to scan a larger area than 6x9cm 
atone time. Basically the film holder is positioned inside a cage with a 
6x9cm opening, and then the cage and the film holder together is pulled 
under the sensor to scan the film. Scanning a larger area would require 
interrupting the scanning, repositioning the holder iside the cage and 
then doing another scan. Maybe there's something similar going on with 
the 8000?

> It needs a wet mount carrier then like I have made for the Nikon 8000.  
> Never had a 120tf carrier in my hands so can't judge whether it is possible

You can easily remove the top glass plate and wet mount on the bottom 
one. I tried it with lighter fluid and it worked well, except that the 
lighter fluid evaporated too quickly for me to reliably finish the whole 
scan.

I know you're supposed to cover the film with a second sheet of acetate 
or something, but then you're back to additional surfaces collecting 
dust. Is there a reliable way to do this without covering the film with 
another surface of some sort?

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Daniel Staver wrote:

>>Good news.
>>I asked him several things last week among them to add the Grey Lab and 
>>RGB Lab space profiles of QTR to Vuescan but it will not happen.
>>Well scanning at 16 bit and assigning 2.2 Gamma to the Tiff and 
>>converting that to Grey Lab in PSCS will not change much in the data 
>>anyway but it is a bit less elegant. The other question was for an extra 
>>code for the Nikon 8000 wet mount carrier so I can get the maximum area 
>>possible in one scan on the 8000, it is however hardcoded in the 
>>firmware of the scanner so I can forget that.
>>    
>>
>
>He already fixed the glass holder ten minutes ago.
>
>But now there's some problems with Vuescan recognizing the entire 
>preview area. I can't reach the last (rightmost) frame of a 35mm strip 
>placed on the glass holder. I'm hoping he'll fix that too.
>  
>
Finding the right frames isn't a forte of Vuescan. For 6x6 etc I often 
use separate settings that I load per frame number. But there's also a 
lousy frame spacing in the cameras I use. Batch scanning with the 35 mm 
carrier goes without problems though.

>I had a look inside my 120tf once. I noticed that the way the hardware 
>was designed it would be impossible to scan a larger area than 6x9cm 
>atone time. Basically the film holder is positioned inside a cage with a 
>6x9cm opening, and then the cage and the film holder together is pulled 
>under the sensor to scan the film. Scanning a larger area would require 
>interrupting the scanning, repositioning the holder iside the cage and 
>then doing another scan. Maybe there's something similar going on with 
>the 8000?
>  
>
It is the same in the 8000, a traction unit that clamps the carrier for 
the scan, next frame the carrier is repositioned in the traction unit 
and clamped again. The traction unit has a maximum of 83 mm for the 
length. But the width of scan can vary per carrier and the maximum width 
is the one for the rotatable glassholder that can rotate a 56x83 mm 
frame to 5 degrees. The crop then may be 61 or 63 mm wide, I would like 
to use that for the wet mount carrier but when I use the (hole) code of 
that carrier I have to add an extra code for the mask used in the 
carrier which makes the total more complex. It would have been much 
easier to use a special code for my carrier and the maximum dimensions 
say 63 x 83 mm.

>  
>
>>It needs a wet mount carrier then like I have made for the Nikon 8000.  
>>Never had a 120tf carrier in my hands so can't judge whether it is possible
>>    
>>
>
>You can easily remove the top glass plate and wet mount on the bottom 
>one. I tried it with lighter fluid and it worked well, except that the 
>lighter fluid evaporated too quickly for me to reliably finish the whole 
>scan.
>
>I know you're supposed to cover the film with a second sheet of acetate 
>or something, but then you're back to additional surfaces collecting 
>dust. Is there a reliable way to do this without covering the film with 
>another surface of some sort?
>  
>
I always use an extra sheet of transparent PET on top. The capillary 
force is much better (but my glass is 11 x 27 cm wide) and there's 
almost no evaporation at all (could scan 24 hours later if needed).  
Simco, powered electrostatic brushes + airflow is available and two 
silicon dust collector rolls too. That's what you have when your main 
business has been silkscreen printing on polycarbonates :-) I don't 
believe in mounting without the extra sheet.

Ernst

> What works best with the Minolta 5400?

Depends on what you're scanning. For BW negative film I've always 
thought Vuescan gave the best results. Keep in mind that my only goal is 
to capture the full tonal range without loss of shadow/highlight detail 
and then do the actual editing in photoshop.

For color negative film I want the scanner software to give me colors 
that match the image as I shot it. I've found it requires way too much 
post-processing if the colors aren't reasonably good in the first place. 
For this I prefer the NegPos plugin. I don't remember if I ever tried 
the NegPos plugin with the 5400 scanner, but it works really well with 
the 120tf.

For slide film almost anything works. I've never had any difficulty 
getting good color from slide film, I just hate the way my pictures 
always end up clipped one way or the other when I shoot slides.

> I have only 35mm film to scan. On a Mac, with which I've heard the 
> Nikon scanners don't work very well. So I thought I'd get a 5400 and 
> maybe buy LaserSoft SilverFast software to use with it, if that would 
> help.

I don't like the Silverfast software. None of the color negatve profiles 
really comes close to what I think the scan should look like, and it 
does too much auto-correction in the software.

The BW profiles are also too contrasty and dark.

> Should a Mac user who is willing to pay a premium for better 35mm 
> scans instead consider getting a Microtek 120 to get better 35mm 
> scans?

Well, it's slower, more noisy and takes much longer time to scan. The 
only good things about it is that it does MF and that it has a glass 
holder to keep the film flat. The glass holder is a big deal for me. I 
was unhappy with the unsharp edges in the scans I got from my 5400. I 
really want to get good edge to edge sharpness in all my scans. The 
glass holder means a lot of extra dust though. You now have six surfaces 
to clean instead of two.

It also doesn't have ICE, so if you plan to scan a lot of color film I 
would definitely skip the 120tf.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Hi,

I've been following this thread with interest, since we're going to 
purchase a medium-format film scanner for our fine art school's digital 
photo lab. We're considering the Microtek 120tf and the Minolta DiMAGE Scan 
Multi Pro. We currently use a Nikon 4000 ED for 35 mm film, and will be 
scanning B&W, color negs and slide film, and printing them on an Epson 7600 
with Ultrachrome inks (we're just starting to use QTR to print monochrome 
images).
Does anyone have any experience/suggestions about comparing those two 
scanners (regarding issues like sharpness, film flatness, dynamic 
range/shadow detail, etc?)

Thanks in advance,
Paulo Baptista

> Finding the right frames isn't a forte of Vuescan. For 6x6 etc I often 
> use separate settings that I load per frame number. But there's also a 
> lousy frame spacing in the cameras I use. Batch scanning with the 35 mm 
> carrier goes without problems though.

Ed told me that the "Input|Frame spacing" and "Input|Frame offset" lets 
you do this. For 35mm I used 38mm frame spacing and 2mm offset. This 
accurately let me preview each individual 35mm frame in the glass 
holder. I also limited the preview area under "Crop" to only scan as 
high as the 35mm film strip.

Similar settings could be made for each film size you need to use.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Daniel, could you explain a bit more about extracting one of the channels to
get a sharp scan? How do you do that?  Do you mean with a color scan? My
issue is cobra-skin patterns that sometimes happen with my microtec 4500t,
only when scanning color neg.  I haven¹t been able to get rid of them,
except the very crude long way in ps.

Thanks a lot
Nick




On 3/8/05 5:37 PM, "Daniel Staver" <daniel@...> wrote:

> On my 120tf I have to scan as 48 bit and then extract one of the
> channels to get a sharp scan. A 16bit scan is a composite of all three
> channels and I often get blurry wavelike patterns throughout the image
> that way. I've heard many other users who's scanners have the same
> problem, but I think it varies from scanner to scanner so you might be
> lucky and get one that doesn't.
> 
> I use Silverfast. The Microtek software tends to crash a lot, and
> Vuescan just doesn't work well at all with this scanner.
> 
> I don't like the negfix profiles. They're too contrasty and seldom match
> the actual image they way I want them to. I dont like to work in HDR
> mode either, as I like to see the image I'm scanning as a positive. Most
> of the time I just choose a profile that lets me capture a full tonal
> range with no clipping at either end and do the rest of the work in
> Photoshop.
> 
> The glass holder is essential to get sharp scans, even for 35mm. But
> it's poorly built. The six plastic bits that hold the top part of the
> film holder to the bottom part break real easily, and I've had to
> replace five of mine already.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no
> 
>> > I've now purchased a Microtek 120TF to scan my 6x7 and 6x4.5 black and
>> white negs.
>> > 
>> > As Im just getting started with this process, I'd love to hear about your
>> workflows if you
>> > are doing these same things. What settings should I start with? any
>> problems Im likely to
>> > encounter etc etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 Sponsor
>  
>  ADVERTISEMENT
>  
> <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129jd3vm7/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=grou
> ps/S=1705019182:HM/EXP=1110409120/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://www.netf
> lix.com/Default?mqso=60190075>
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
> *  
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> * DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsub
> scribe> 
> *  
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
> 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]