|
Yeah, I'd definitely say so. I had no idea they were that cheap. Might pick up one myself.
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Questions for the scanner crew, I'm debating on getting a Epson V600 and was wondering two things. I'm scanning with a V600 and betterscanning holders and finding the setup awesome for MF and 35mm. From what I understand, the advantage to the V700 is that it can scan large format negatives and many more 35mm/MF frames at once. If that's not an issue for you, go for it!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
I upgraded from a v600 to a v700 a few years ago and the 700 is head and shoulders above the 600.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
I finally gooned up and decided to start making inroads on my massive backlog of film (literally years) to scan. Or rather, I tried to, until I opened the files, looked at all the dust/tiny hairs, and despaired. Dug up my rocket blower and hit the bed with that, then rubbed down the ANR inserts (have the Betterscanning holder for my V750) with a microfiber cloth, and it's better, but still not great. My scanner and the ANR glass still needs some cleaning off (recommendations?), but what techniques/stuff do you all use to cut down on that stuff? I have a graphics tablet + PS to clone out the most egregious crud, but I find it pretty drat tedious and time-consuming, so I want to try and get rid of as much of it at the source as I can.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I finally gooned up and decided to start making inroads on my massive backlog of film (literally years) to scan. Canned air on the negatives is stronger than a rocket blower. That should help a bit. The dirty secret is that there really isn't much of a shortcut. It's tiresome but that's what you get for shooting film.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Polaroid's dust and scratch removal PS plugin is pretty nice if you don't feel like hand-cloning out the dust. http://arthurpolaroid.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/the-little-dots-are-gone-polaroid-dust-scratch-removal-ver-1-0-0-15/
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Could you post the direct DL link to the Mac plugin please? Any time I click that it just brings me to a calendar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Could you post the direct DL link to the Mac plugin please? Any time I click that it just brings me to a calendar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Some direct DDL links: http://web.archive.org/web/20020612132140/http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/pdsr1_0.exe http://web.archive.org/web/20050701000000*/http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/pdsrmac1_0.sit
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Cool, thanks. Got a .sit file, what do I do with this? Quantum of Phallus fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Jun 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Cool, thanks. Got a .sit file, what do I do with this? That's old school. StuffIt Expander.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Yeah, I tried StuffIt and it wouldn't do anything :/ "The Stuffit engine was unable to determine file format" Quantum of Phallus fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Jun 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Whoops. Wrong link for the mac version.  http://web.archive.org/web/20051018191907/http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/pdsrmac1_0.sit
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
'You can't open the application "%@" because it may be damaged or incomplete" Maybe it just won't run on a 64-bit OS?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
It probably is meant for OSX with PowerPC compatibility (Leopard and before I think). Here's the .8bf file which should (maybe) be the standalone file for a Photoshop plugin. http://www.mediafire.com/download/fq7p6yc3cjieb7y/PolaDSR.8bf I remember getting it to work a while back but that may have been a 32-bit version of Photoshop. My free copy of PS just expired and I'm too lazy to get it up and running again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Does anyone know what might be the problem if there's a faint orange line running vertically through the image? It seems to be superimposed onto the image because there's still detail within the line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Could be a hot pixel on the scanner's sensor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Could be a hot pixel on the scanner's sensor. After some googling, I have a feeling it might be dust in the calibration area of the scanner, because the line isn't hard edged but wide and soft.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:After some googling, I have a feeling it might be dust in the calibration area of the scanner, because the line isn't hard edged but wide and soft. What scanner is it? I just had a Epson Expression 1680 do that x 10 here at work. Hard and soft lines of various colors. :/
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Whitezombi posted:What scanner is it? I just had a Epson Expression 1680 do that x 10 here at work. Hard and soft lines of various colors. :/ It's an Epson V700. It's not consistent tho, just did a bunch of 4x5 scans and the line didn't show up anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
I get that sometimes and I just have to wipe the glass near the top of the scanner bed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:It's an Epson V700. It's not consistent tho, just did a bunch of 4x5 scans and the line didn't show up anymore. That's how mine started and got worse and nothing fixes it. I hope it was a one time thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
I get this error now when I try and run a scan on my v500: "Could not read the ICC profile. Saving image canceled" Its loving driving me nuts. I've tried uninstalling everything, gone through the library folder in the root directory (on a mac) and deleted anything epson, reinstalling the latest version of epson scan, and nothing, same error. I remember people having issues after upgrading to Mavericks, and I think this is the issue. There must be some file somewhere that I haven't deleted thats stopping the upgrade of the software from fully working. Anyone got any ideas? Or suggestions on where to look for files to delete?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Spedman posted:I get this error now when I try and run a scan on my v500: I mean I'm not using the V500 on my OSX Machine, but since it's bitching about ICC profiles have you tried temporarily removing/disabling it? System Preferences -> Display -> Color Tab -> (Select another Profile)?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
I have a calibrated screen, using a spyder express, and playing with the profile doesn't change the error. So, after much loving around, in the preference for the output tiff I set it such that the ICC profile wasn't embedded with the image, and everything was happy. No idea why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2014 10:08
|
|
|
I love my Epson 4870 but the holders really suck for excessively curly film. The center of the negatives always dip down and make contact with the flatbed glass, causing distortion, blurry scans, and newton rings. I don't want to order expensive anti-newton ring glass, so I experimented with taping thin pieces of rigid wire to the holders. I placed them between where each frame would rest. This a quick first "prototype".  1:1 screenshot of a scan (no processing) before:  And after:  It's clear the wire makes a huge difference. I honestly don't know why the holders aren't manufactured with thin pieces of plastic between each frame, since it obviously helps with scan quality so much. I am going to experiment with other materials, because I don't want bits of wire scratching my flatbed glass or my negatives, but I am not sure what would work. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Wood won't scratch glass... You could get something like these and use an exacto knife to cut one into 4 thin strips, maybe?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Why not just press your negatives between something heavy for a few days to remove curl?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
I have, some film just resists fully flattening. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:It's clear the wire makes a huge difference. I honestly don't know why the holders aren't manufactured with thin pieces of plastic between each frame, since it obviously helps with scan quality so much. Because then they'd have to design an insert or special holder for 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
ZippySLC posted:Because then they'd have to design an insert or special holder for 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, etc. Well, you could design the edge of the holder with a zipper-like tooth pattern and then just give the user a half dozen loose crossbars that lock into the teeth, so you could move the bars wherever. Or some kind of friction-fit piece that is locked in by the top of the holder. Or non-NR glass like the Betterscanning holder. At the end of the day it's just not a design priority for scanner companies. Out of all the people who buy the scanner, how many will never scan film in the first place? How many will just scan some old family photos from 35mm negatives a couple times? They don't know whether the film holder sucks or not. Now, how many will scan medium format film, and be technical enough to know that they're getting film bowing? And is pissing off those people worth the cost of giving every single customer a better medium format film holder? And of course the serious pros are using real film scanners, not a $100 flatbed. Or at the least they're buying the V700 or something. There's solutions that could be done. But overall it's probably better for Epson just to let that 1% of their user base deal with it than to really solve it. There's still Betterscanning holders if you really want to spend $100 in improvements on a $100 scanner. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
My scanner retailed for $499 in 2004 thank you very much 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:
When I had a V600 and was shooting almost exclusively 120 the betterscanning holder was worth every penny of that extra $100.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
I will probably break down and get the new and improved Betterscanning holder once they come out with the dual 35/120 holder. I scanned two rolls of 120 last night and it was just a pain in the rear end. Thankfully the negs were flat, but it's just a pain getting them into the Epson holder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
I "scanned" some Portra with my dSLR and I'm having a lot of trouble getting the colors to look right. This is the best I could make this photo look: DSC05506 by LargeHadron, on Flickr Does it look wrong? Any advice on curves/etc? It seems like each photo behaves wildly differently depending on the lighting conditions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
LargeHadron posted:I "scanned" some Portra with my dSLR and I'm having a lot of trouble getting the colors to look right. This is the best I could make this photo look: It looks to me like your backlighting has inconsistent color temperature across the frame and might not be full-spectrum. Even aside from that the end result looks a little magenta to me. Mind posting a small version of the original photo straight out of your DSLR?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Yeah, no problem. DSC05506-2 by LargeHadron, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Sell your DSLR and iPad and buy a scanner that won't clip your red channel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
LargeHadron posted:Yeah, no problem. Yeah, you definitely shouldn't use an iPad as a backlight. Also, your red channel is clipped. efb
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:20 |
|
|
ansel autisms posted:Sell your DSLR and iPad and buy a scanner that won't clip your red channel. I don't think I want to do that. Is there a way to get around this with what I have?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 17:29
|
|