|
Is epson15897.dmg definitely the file you have?
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Is epson15897.dmg definitely the file you have? Yeah, have downloaded it several times. Someone with a Canon scanner found a workaround with using an older version of Epson Scan, but it's epson15897 all the way back to like OS 10.5 or something. (Tried the 10.4 but it was an updater that didn't work out either). I've also been trying the Japanese drivers/Epson Scan, which I think might be more on the right track (says it can't communicate with the V750 ones installed). If I install the Japanese GT-X970 drivers instead of the US V750 ones it shows up in Printers and Scanners, although the scanner still works fine in Image Capture or Vuescan whether it shows up in Printers and Scanners or not.  Still get that thing about it not being able to write to the disk though, ugh.
Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Oct 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
That's weird. I've only tried up to the V700 in terms of newer models though but anything before that has worked fine. I'm on 10.9.4, are you on 10.9.5? It could be something no-one's flagged yet, I haven't updated to 9.5 as Photoshop, Lightroom and Pro Tools are all relatively stable on this OSX build and the only new thing is like an update to Safari or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
When I had to reinstall EpsonScan on Mavericks I needed to dig into the library files of both the user and root account and delete every single little file associated with the previous install to get the new version working. It drove me mad after work for three days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
I just threw in the towel and downloaded Mountain Lion again from my app store account, wiped the SSD, and started over again with 10.8. Hoping to get through all my scanning before I move at the beginning of Feb and then sell the scanner, guess I'll try Mavericks out then.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
10.10 will probably be out by then, and then we'll ALL have driver issues 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
Is there a proper way to scan B&W that isn't 16bit? My blacks get crushed very easily and the curves in general behave as they did for my colour shots back when I was scanning 24bit sRGB (as opposed to 48bit ProPhoto, which seems to give me more control). On a whim I scanned B&W at 48bit and then converted to greyscale in PS (as it still had a blue tint which inverted to red) and that just gave me more options about colour balance, and the end result really didn't seem any better than the original.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:Is there a proper way to scan B&W that isn't 16bit? My blacks get crushed very easily and the curves in general behave as they did for my colour shots back when I was scanning 24bit sRGB (as opposed to 48bit ProPhoto, which seems to give me more control). Scan as a 16-bit positive TIFF. What do your scans' histograms look like before any PS corrections?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
The most recent scan's histogram is like this: Which, after some levels and curves, resulted in this picture. It's possible I'm just not terribly good at levels and curves yet, and I'm still fairly new to black+white scanning. (It also might just be that shot -- a night-time long exposure probably isn't the best example and this might be perfectly normal). One thing I did do differently this time was edit in Lightroom first (to correct perspective, very shameful) and then when I exported the TIFF it converted to ProPhoto, which seemed a bit easier to work with than the Dot Gain +20% the original scanner file saved as. But I don't know if that's relevant. rohan fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Oct 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 11:03
|
|
|
edit != quote
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
Anyone got any tips for scanning Kodachrome in VueScan? Despite previewing well, the RAW files come out insanely dark.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
try it with a lime posted:Anyone got any tips for scanning Kodachrome in VueScan? Despite previewing well, the RAW files come out insanely dark. The raw files are dark because they are just that, raw. No software edits have been done to them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
try it with a lime posted:Anyone got any tips for scanning Kodachrome in VueScan? Despite previewing well, the RAW files come out insanely dark. Hope you're scanning 16 bit per channel ('48 bit') and setting your black and white points after scanning correctly
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
I grew a brain and figured it out, thanks guys. Also Jesuschristkodachrome. It's depressing how good it looks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
try it with a lime posted:Also Jesuschristkodachrome. It's depressing how good it looks. Yeah it's insane, I bought a load of slides last year and managed to get a projector in college, the quality on them was insane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
The film has a crazy amount of relief in the surface, you can see when you hold it at an angle in the light. I was just glad I got to shoot a few rolls before it disappeared.
Spedman fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 10:30
|
|
|
Spedman posted:The film has a crazy amount of relief in the surface, you can see when you hold it at an angle in the light. I was just glad I got to shoot a few rolls before it disappeared. I have 5 rolls in my freezer that I didn't get a chance to shoot before Dwayne's shut down their K-14 line. (One of them is Kodachrome 25  )
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:I have 5 rolls in my freezer that I didn't get a chance to shoot before Dwayne's shut down their K-14 line. (One of them is Kodachrome 25 I don't know if I'm just now noticing your av text or if it's new, but  There's an Aussie guy who did his own, apparently it's possible (just a massive PITA, if you're doing color) and the chemical patents and stuff are all available in the public domain. He was originally trained as a Kodachrome tech before it became obsolete and works in a pro lab, said it was definitely not something you could do in your kitchen and not worth the hassle to do commercially, even in small quantities. edit: I was saving my lone roll of Kodachrome 25 for Halong Day. Naturally, my XA jammed halfway through it. Those things are nice but can be unreliable little shits, had the shutter die on another one.  
Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Oct 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I don't know if I'm just now noticing your av text or if it's new, but Yeah, it's been my av since a mod challenge in 2012  I shot a bunch of Kodachrome in the early 00's but my photos were kinda bad back then (just like now) so I don't know if I have ever scanned any of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Spedman posted:The film has a crazy amount of relief in the surface, you can see when you hold it at an angle in the light. I was just glad I got to shoot a few rolls before it disappeared. Yeah I've read that's why it's sometimes really averse to scanning since you would ideally need to scan at multiple 'depths'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Chill Callahan posted:Yeah I've read that's why it's sometimes really averse to scanning since you would ideally need to scan at multiple 'depths'. Could try scanning with a Lytro!  What it did to skies always blew me away, here's some crappy scans from 2010:  Glen Coe by mr_student, on Flickr  Strathkinness by mr_student, on Flickr  Inch Beach - Ireland by mr_student, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
Anyone have any tips for scanning black and white 35mm film with a V550? I went to a darkroom class recently and got a roll of film developed for the first time (t-max 400), I've tried scanning them (dull side down, using the standard b/w settings on the EPSON software) but the results I've gotten have been fairly poor. There seems to be a lot of digital noise across the image, especially in the highlights and shadows, as if the dynamic range of the scan is really low. Here's the least garbage looking scan of the lot but it's still fairly poor. During developing, the guy who was showing how it's done was been pretty heavy handed with agitation and quite loose with times, could it just be a case of them being developed poorly? Here's the some of the negatives held up to a window if that makes it any easier to tell;  I'll be doing a printing class in a couple of days using the same negatives so maybe looking at them through an enlarger will give me a better idea of what sort of quality they are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
My parents have taken on the task of scanning all of my grandparents' old photos. As far as the hardware, I'm going to recommend the V600 since it looks like it's the best for their price range (~200 or so), but how easy is the software to use? My mom's going to be doing most of this, and she can't set up a backup drive without running into problems. She'll be doing the scanning on her 2013 Macbook Pro.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
^^ for these types of projects, I always plug Scancafe or a similar service. It depends on what your parents' time is worth, of course.crap nerd posted:Anyone have any tips for scanning black and white 35mm film with a V550? I went to a darkroom class recently and got a roll of film developed for the first time (t-max 400), I've tried scanning them (dull side down, using the standard b/w settings on the EPSON software) but the results I've gotten have been fairly poor. There seems to be a lot of digital noise across the image, especially in the highlights and shadows, as if the dynamic range of the scan is really low. It's been a few years since I've shot Tri-X in 35mm, but that does look pretty grainy for non-push processing. Do you have Digital ICE on in Epson Scan? It will pick up the silver halide crystals in regular process B&W and try to get rid of them, thinking they're dust. (It works fine on C-41 process B&W films though.) It'll definitely cause your normal B&W scans to look like dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
I didn't have Digital ICE turned on, here's another example of it. You can see it's actually resolving a fair amount of detail in the sand in the foreground but the rest of the image looks like total rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Well, for one thing, your scanner isn't focused on the film plane, you may want to try shimming the holder.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Thinking about getting a cheap scanner for scanning in paper drawings, are any of those really cheap handheld scanners worth a drat or is it worth going for the Epson v500 even if I'm not working with film or anything fancy like that? Though I guess I'm starting to get into traditional coloring too, don't know how well a cheaper scanner would handle that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
pandaK posted:Thinking about getting a cheap scanner for scanning in paper drawings, are any of those really cheap handheld scanners worth a drat or is it worth going for the Epson v500 even if I'm not working with film or anything fancy like that? Though I guess I'm starting to get into traditional coloring too, don't know how well a cheaper scanner would handle that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 11:52
|
|
|
Spedman posted:What it did to skies always blew me away, here's some crappy scans from 2010: That's probably just good exposure control and contrast, so the exposure hits the film's dynamic range right. My Stylus Epic is really good at doing that too, here's a random snaps on some random film (probably Fuji 200):    
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Oct 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
UGH the stylus epic is so good. I lost mine on a shoot gently caress. RIP, such a good camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
So I did my first scan today with my V600. Here is the scan. (2 photos is 1 35mm frame for reference). It's shot with a lovely toy camera, so it's obviously not a great reference, but should be able to judge the scan by the grain, right? This is Portra 400.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Looks pretty good for a toy camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Well, it's time for my to scan the poo poo outta my stuff! I've recently scanned all of my documents (I have a Canon Imageformula P215) so that I can eliminate as much paper from my life as possible, and I'd like to do the same with the boatloads of photographs, negatives and slides I've got that I don't need to keep around any more (but still want a record of). I looked into renting a negative/film scanner but it's on the order of $150-$200 for a weekend, and with tweaking + setup I doubt I could do all my work in that time. Is the best all-around solution still the Epson V700? Does anyone have thoughts of it vs. an Epson V800? It seems like it was recently released and there's still no real price difference between the two. And just curious, has anyone here tried the DIY route of using a DSLR to do negatives/slides? I've got a Canon 5Dii and a woodworking shop...
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Guitarchitect posted:Well, it's time for my to scan the poo poo outta my stuff! I've recently scanned all of my documents (I have a Canon Imageformula P215) so that I can eliminate as much paper from my life as possible, and I'd like to do the same with the boatloads of photographs, negatives and slides I've got that I don't need to keep around any more (but still want a record of). I'm in the process of doing the same thing (finished off all the paper stuff last month, film is... coming along) with a V750. You'd do well to buy whatever model of flatbed secondhand (if you're in a bigger metro area, might even be able to find something on Craigslist) and then re-sell it at the end. I actually kinda regret not buying a Coolscan 9000 and doing that just so I'd have the last word in consumer scanning quality, but whatever. I've used a DSLR to do slides, it's pretty easy, especially if you buy an old slide copying rig off eBay or KEH. I was looking in to doing it with C-41 negatives and it seems like a lot of hassle - different films have a different amount of that orange base/color cast, which means they need to be individually corrected. B&W wouldn't be so bad as far as the processing, but you've still got to find a way to wrangle the negative strips, slides are a lot more simple. Finally (and this is personal), I'd recommend hanging on to the negs even after you scan. You never know when you'll want to do a really big enlargement or something down the line. I've shot a shitload of film and I'm pretty sure I can still fit it into a single Printfile archival binder, two at worst.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Wife works with a lot of photographers. They send her images, she posts them on blogs. Sometimes she gets photos from film people who've had their photos scanned, and they look fine on her Mac. But when she posts them online, suddenly they're 90 degrees crooked. It's easy to fix (basically import and then re-export everything in Lightroom), but how can it be prevented? It's really weird, since you only see them crooked when they're uploaded; on the computer, they're all fine. Is this something weird with whatever scanner software is being used?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
IIRC, there's an orientation flag in the EXIF data which not all websites recognize.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
Well, poo poo. Guess who scratched up one corner of their V750 glass?  Think it might have been the metal rings of a notebook I was scanning or something. I was starting to panic because Epson doesn't sell parts themselves, just link to vendors, none of whom stocked it. Then I thought to check eBay, and found I can buy a replacement glass assembly there for $45. Think I may see if toothpaste will buff the scratches out first though, they're very fine/shallow and it's not like I have anything to lose. Fortunately I can just align my negs towards the bottom and miss the scratches all together in the meantime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Think it might have been the metal rings of a notebook I was scanning or something.  why would you do this
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:
I'm not really sure what it was, and I was even cutting the pages out of my Moleskines and other soft notebooks to scan to potentially avoid anything. I know the negs and neg holders sure as hell didn't do it though, and I've been doing a lot of document and other misc scanning on it in the last few months (moving abroad and want to digitize all the paper stuff I have as well as negs, so I can also ditch the V750), something may have slipped through.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
I've been scanning my 120 negs at 2400dpi on my V750, now starting to move into 35mm and 4x5. Should I up/drop the resolution for either, or keep on keepin' on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 13:29
|
|