Epson V800 - Epson Scan Vs Silverfast

[alanmcd]

Can anyone shed some light on some scanner queries? I am scanning 4x5" B&W negatives in the supplied holder.
My objective is to come up with a workflow to produce scans capable of 20x30" prints, and I would like, in the first instance, to provide my own scan - a drum scan by the service might be the final result if I'm happy with my own work.

1: The height adjustment on the holder appears to do absolutely squat to the final image quality. In fact, the documentation doesn't even talk about these little height adjusters at all. Correct?

2: I've been testing Epson Scan Vs Silverfast SE which comes with my Perfection V800
Epson Scan uses ICE as per hardware name. I think Silverfast uses the same hardware feature but calls it iSRD. It’s an additional infrared scan which maps dust and scratch marks then processing the original scan to remove the mapped marks. Correct?

3: (Observation) Epson Scan is faster than Silverfast - not sure why. The processing of iSRD in Silverfast takes forever.

4: Scanning at 3200 ppi on Epson Scan gives me black blobs/squares in lots of places where it appears to be below some kind of a threshold. 4800 delivers an acceptable image. Is this by design?
Silverfast 3200 does not give me the black blobs - not sure why Epson Scan has this threshold issue. Or is it a setting I need to discover?

5: The 4800 Silverfast scan creates a 1Gb TIF file for 4x5 area.
With Silverfast you can set Ilford HP5Plus 400 ISO - not sure what this would make the scan do - Epson Scan doesn’t offer such a selection. But Silverfast then defaults to CCR (Color Cast Removal) Why? for B&W?

6: Lightroom imports this file OK but you have to be patient during develop processes, but I am working with a printing service/lab and they are asking for an 8bit 254dpi file output which is only 95Mb in size. I'm seeing what it finally produces. The first guy I spoke to said he needed a 200Mb file but upon further reading of their spec, this is only created for 16bit. 8bit produces 95Mb. So I'm sending the 95Mb file to see what it produces.

7: I suppose I'd like to get scanner output which is close to the final output required. 1Gb files in Lightroom produce a real lag when you are doing spot removal and that sort of thing. If there’s no benefit in acquiring this file size in the first place, then there’s a good reason to avoid it. But my gut is telling me that you need all this information in the file to produce the final downsized output at its best. Is this a common observation?

8: When I export from Lightroom to Flickr, the largest size (Original) is 11414 x 14518 which implies 38x48" at 300dpi, but this is a JPG... Is this any different to TIF in terms of printability?

9: The service says it can print 20x30 from 5Mb JPGs - is this possible?
Here's the example I'm working with:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/metadigital/24266887124/in/album-72157664271821431/

Obviously I'm just the same as all permanently confused people WRT resolutions for printing and screen output.
But some pointers from an expert here would be greatly appreciated.
In the first instance I'd like to see a 20x30 to see how my post processing is going. Even if I get a drum scan done, I probably want to post process myself a little.

Using the Silverfast help file is one thing, but every Youtube video I watch, the experts(?) always recommend not using any settings in the scanner software, instead recommending you use Photoshop etc for any adjustments.
It would be nice to read an authoritative masterclass on this subject.

regards
Alan

[tjvitale]

I don't use the devices supplied. I take a mechanics 6" steel ruler (1/2" wide in 1/100" and mm). Turn in upside down and raise the 6"-end 6mm off the platen using a 6mm stack of PostIts. One mm is equal to 1 inch on the ruler.

Make the scans you want to test. Note where the image is sharpest, or rather the range of sharpness. Mine was at about 0.5 to 1.5 mm; this takes some experience and time to see definitively. I use a 1/32" or 0.03" (0.9mm) polycarbonate sheet to raise the negative off the platen with my solvent of choice for a wet mount. Using solvent at the three interface locations you have access to. The underside of the platen is still a air-glass interface, but nothing can be done between it and the 'mirror(s) & lens' component. I don't know if the underside of platen has any sort of [coating] treatment. The top gets indiscriminate cleaning, so I have assumed it does not ay sort of coating.

This works for me.

Tim
510-594-8277

[RHITMrB]

The holders with my V700 came adjusted to the correct height, but the adjustment is there for if your scanner isn't in the normal range. Sounds like this isn't an issue for you.

ICE doesn't work on B&W film (at least stuff that isn't C41) and the blobs you are seeing from Epson Scan are most likely a result of this. Silverfast may be falling back on software dust removal when hardware (IR channel-based) ICE fails. I dust my scans manually, since all software dust/noise reduction makes the image less sharp or has false positives.

Silverfast is doing things like "Color Cast Removal" because you're scanning your film as a color negative. Try scanning as 16-bit greyscale - filesize will be smaller than a 16-bit color image and tonal information will be more detailed than with an 8-bit color image.

JPEG is losslessly compressed and, especially with B&W, prone to posterization and blocky image artifacts. Use a printing service that will accept TIFFs.

Finally, I avoid letting the scanning software make adjustments for me simply because it's so inconsistent. I always scan my negatives in Silverfast as 48-bit (color) or 16-bit (greyscale) positives with zeroed out adjustments and do everything else in Photoshop and Lightroom.

[alanmcd]

Wow - all that sophisticated hardware an we still need to resort to posit notes as shims? I don't get it.

[alanmcd]

The ICE setting still seems to function with Epson Scan. It's the iSRD which falls over with SilverFast. See my other posts of example scans. They don't show the blobs that I'm talking about but is this effect as a result of trying to use with with B&W? If so, why doesn't silverfast just prevent the use of iSRD when you've selected B&W?

[mrred]

Wow - all that sophisticated hardware an we still need to resort to posit notes as shims? I don't get it.

The scanner has electronic control over focus. Vuescan allows you to overside (adjust) this. I'm not sure why Epson Scan does not. I have no regard for Silverfast so I am not surprised.

[mijosc]

The scanner has electronic control over focus. Vuescan allows you to overside (adjust) this.

Really?! My V750 has no electronic focus control. I didn't think the V800/850 was that different.

[alanmcd]

No wonder the height adjusters make no difference

[alanmcd]

The V800 manual is totally silent on electronic focus control. Where did you get that information from?

[mrred]

Really?! My V750 has no electronic focus control. I didn't think the V800/850 was that different.

It does. You will see it with Vuescan pro in pro mode.

[RHITMrB]

The scanner has electronic control over focus. Vuescan allows you to overside (adjust) this. I'm not sure why Epson Scan does not. I have no regard for Silverfast so I am not surprised.

Not true. There's just the two settings (normal and "full area" for scanning 8x10 or whatever larger-than-4x5 film directly on the glass). This is accomplished using one of two lenses. Silverfast does have this setting available, but it's not helpful here.


Wow - all that sophisticated hardware an we still need to resort to posit notes as shims? I don't get it.
I don't think this is necessary and the DOF on the V700/750/800/850 is enough that the three adjustment positions will be enough unless something is seriously wrong.


The ICE setting still seems to function with Epson Scan. It's the iSRD which falls over with SilverFast. See my other posts of example scans. They don't show the blobs that I'm talking about but is this effect as a result of trying to use with with B&W? If so, why doesn't silverfast just prevent the use of iSRD when you've selected B&W?
What I said is still true, then, just flip which program is doing what! :P If I were scanning C41 film as B&W, I could still use ICE - in any case I'd rather my scanning software be less restrictive than more.

[alen]

It does. You will see it with Vuescan pro in pro mode.

I think this is worth a thread on its own and im sure many here would love to know more.

[RHITMrB]

I think this is worth a thread on its own and im sure many here would love to know more.

Again, he's referring to the dual lens system, which is mentioned explicitly in plenty of places in the manual and marketing literature. One lens is focused directly on the upper surface of the platen and the other is some distance (1.5mm or so?) above the glass, for use with the film holders.

edit to illustrate: http://i.imgur.com/sVqVx3K.gif

[Kirk Gittings]

Correct and it does not have any electronic focus control. Each lens has a fixed focus point.

[neil poulsen]

. . . Finally, I avoid letting the scanning software make adjustments for me simply because it's so inconsistent. I always scan my negatives in Silverfast as 48-bit (color) or 16-bit (greyscale) positives with zeroed out adjustments and do everything else in Photoshop and Lightroom.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I've spoken with some. That's my approach for b&W, to "zero" out adjustments; better to make the same adjustments in Photoshop, which is more capable. (Still open to contrary arguments, though.)

However, if one's using a more sophisticated scanner, like a drum scanner (e.g. Tango?), where one can adjust the gain of the light source, etc., that's a different ballgame. That's not possible with any of the prosumer scanners of which I'm aware.

I do like Siverfast for reducing the effect of the mask when scanning color negative film. These are not different ICC profiles that are applied, which clip the image to the saturation of whatever target has been used to create the profile.. Silverfast has worked with different film manufacturers to arrive at "settings" that they internally apply for each type of film.

[RHITMrB]

I'm not an expert by any means, but I've spoken with some. That's my approach for b&W, to "zero" out adjustments; better to make the same adjustments in Photoshop, which is more capable. (Still open to contrary arguments, though.)

However, if one's using a more sophisticated scanner, like a drum scanner (e.g. Tango?), where one can adjust the gain of the light source, etc., that's a different ballgame. That's not possible with any of the prosumer scanners of which I'm aware.

I do like Siverfast for reducing the effect of the mask when scanning color negative film. These are not different ICC profiles that are applied, which clip the image to the saturation of whatever target has been used to create the profile.. Silverfast has worked with different film manufacturers to arrive at "settings" that they internally apply for each type of film.

Yes, all of my advice here has been for the specific case of the V700, not a drum scanner with a PMT :)

My problem with Negafix and how Silverfast inverts negatives is that it's entirely dependent on what's in the frame. If you include any of the holder, or you have even a slightly different frame size or position than last time you scanned the same negative, the results will be different. I prefer reproducibility in my workflow to convenience.

[alanmcd]

I can agree with this, but how do you tell what is part of the neg and what is not?

[RHITMrB]

I can agree with this, but how do you tell what is part of the neg and what is not?

Your question confuses me. The holder doesn't let any light through, so it's pretty obvious on the scan.

[Jeff T]

I will recommend that you download the Silverfast Ai Studio. Silverfast SE is a free bundled with limited functions. Scan in raw HDR or HDRi format then process your raw files in HDR Studio, where you would make adjustments, then generate your desired output file. HDR Studio is where Silverfast shines.
It will load a 2Gb file in seconds and all adjustment rendered quickly, except for SRD (scratch & dust removal).

Dyes on BW film will appear as dusts in the infrared channel.

HDRi format is just raw plus infrared channel.

Usually it takes less time to scan in HDR than in 48bit Tiff mode.

I agree with RHITMrB about Negafix, but overall it's still better than other options available.

[djdister]

I'm not a big fan of Digital ICE or the scratch and removal (iSRD) scanning options, and really haven't had that many reasons to use it. I would only use those options if the negative was truly horrendous, because in effect you are trusting the software to automatically make corrections to the scan without your intervention or artistic intelligence.

[mrred]

Not true. There's just the two settings (normal and "full area" for scanning 8x10 or whatever larger-than-4x5 film directly on the glass). This is accomplished using one of two lenses. Silverfast does have this setting available, but it's not helpful here.


Assuming you have a later version, look farther down in your input tab. I'm away from home, otherwise I would post a screen capture. And I was not referring to the duel lens.

[Jeff T]

SRD in Silverfast allows 4 masks for setting the size of scratches and dust, and the strength of removal. I'd usually set one mask for removing small round dusts, a second mask for large round dusts, and finally a mask for narrow long scratches. Note, it's only effective in removing dusts and scratches and not intended for cloning large patches.

Using SRD in HDR Studio, I get better results and be done faster than doing manual spotting so I highly recommend you try out this tool.

[Kirk Gittings]

It does. You will see it with Vuescan pro in pro mode.

It doesn't. There is no mechanism for focus control. As there is no hardware for it there is nothing for the software to control. There are two fixed focus lenses to switch between that's all. Focus is controlled by manually raising or lowering the film holder. I'm fairly sure Epson would put electronic focus control in the promotional literature if it had it as would Silverfast. All of us that had 700/750s were hoping for it but the new ones didn't and that was a big disappointment. http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?sku=B11B223201

[RHITMrB]

Assuming you have a later version, look farther down in your input tab. I'm away from home, otherwise I would post a screen capture. And I was not referring to the duel lens.

If you go to Silverfast's page on focus control - http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/focus-control/en.html - you will see a link to "Scanners with Focus Control." Note that this list does not include the V700/750/800/850. Even if you can somehow access this setting in Silverfast when using it with one of these scanners, it won't do anything, because these scanners do not have focus control except by changing the shims on the holders.

[alanmcd]

If you go to Silverfast's page on focus control - http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/focus-control/en.html - you will see a link to "Scanners with Focus Control." Note that this list does not include the V700/750/800/850. Even if you can somehow access this setting in Silverfast when using it with one of these scanners, it won't do anything, because these scanners do not have focus control except by changing the shims on the holders.

That's correct - I can confirm this. The shims are all there is.
I can also confirm that even though luminous landscape says he can see the difference and set the shims to his desired height, I cannot for the life of me see any difference at all.
Alan

[alanmcd]

I'm not a big fan of Digital ICE or the scratch and removal (iSRD) scanning options, and really haven't had that many reasons to use it. I would only use those options if the negative was truly horrendous, because in effect you are trusting the software to automatically make corrections to the scan without your intervention or artistic intelligence.

Agreed. If my negatives a good because I have taken care with them. I'll do the spot removal myself.
If I am scanning for a commercial purpose which has cost effectiveness ahead of artistic demand, I'd probably be asking the operator to use ICE.
Alan

[Doug Fisher]

>>I can also confirm that even though luminous landscape says he can see the difference and set the shims to his desired height, I cannot for the life of me see any difference at all.<<

If you can't see any difference in sharpness between the highest setting and the lowest setting, something is definitely wrong. I get this question occasionally and the most common reason this occurs is because the user is not using (and double checking right before clicking the scan button) the "film with film holder" setting in the software. If you are utilizing the wrong lens then things are so far from optimum that no adjustment of the film holder height will help.

Doug

[alanmcd]

>>I can also confirm that even though luminous landscape says he can see the difference and set the shims to his desired height, I cannot for the life of me see any difference at all.<<

If you can't see any difference in sharpness between the highest setting and the lowest setting, something is definitely wrong. I get this question occasionally and the most common reason this occurs is because the user is not using (and double checking right before clicking the scan button) the "film with film holder" setting in the software. If you are utilizing the wrong lens then things are so far from optimum that no adjustment of the film holder height will help.

Doug

OK - well I'd like to know where these "film and film holder" settings are in the software. Searched and searched Silverfast - no settings that I can see. Searched and searched Epson Scan and I do not see any holder settings.
Alan

[RHITMrB]

OK - well I'd like to know where these "film and film holder" settings are in the software. Searched and searched Silverfast - no settings that I can see. Searched and searched Epson Scan and I do not see any holder settings.
Alan

It's the "Document Type" setting - "Film (with Film Holder)" for when using a holder, so the film is above the glass; "Film (with Film Area Guide)" for when placing the film directly on the glass.

http://i.imgur.com/E2CmIcI.gif

[alanmcd]

>>I can also confirm that even though luminous landscape says he can see the difference and set the shims to his desired height, I cannot for the life of me see any difference at all.<<

If you can't see any difference in sharpness between the highest setting and the lowest setting, something is definitely wrong. I get this question occasionally and the most common reason this occurs is because the user is not using (and double checking right before clicking the scan button) the "film with film holder" setting in the software. If you are utilizing the wrong lens then things are so far from optimum that no adjustment of the film holder height will help.

Doug

146484
This the holder notches as shown in Luminous-Landscape paper by Mark Segal

146481
All scans from Silverfast off 4x5" Ilford HP5Plus 400 film. 2400ppi, TIF File, no Unsharp masking, no negafix setting to Ilford so no orange mask expansion
This is a reference scan...

146482
This is a screen grab displayed at original size using Notch 2 (arrow indicated notch as above)

146483
This is a screen grab of original size from roughly the same position but scanned at Notch 5 (far right on the guide above)

Should there be more difference? Are my eyes that bad that I fail to recognise a world of difference? Or maybe my method is wrong. But I can't see a difference.
Alan

[mrred]

If you go to Silverfast's page on focus control - http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/focus-control/en.html - you will see a link to "Scanners with Focus Control." Note that this list does not include the V700/750/800/850. Even if you can somehow access this setting in Silverfast when using it with one of these scanners, it won't do anything, because these scanners do not have focus control except by changing the shims on the holders.

I'm pretty sure I didn't refer to anything Silverfast.

[alanmcd]

It's the "Document Type" setting - "Film (with Film Holder)" for when using a holder, so the film is above the glass; "Film (with Film Area Guide)" for when placing the film directly on the glass.

http://i.imgur.com/E2CmIcI.gif

OK - but there are no settings for declaring the holder height as per the notches in the four corners of the holders.
Alan

[RHITMrB]

OK - but there are no settings for declaring the holder height as per the notches in the four corners of the holders.
Alan

The holder height adjusts to the scanner, not the other way around.

[alanmcd]

The holder height adjusts to the scanner, not the other way around.

Correct, but see my post a few back now. I have posted a few test shots which show no difference in the adjusters.
Alan

[RHITMrB]

Correct, but see my post a few back now. I have posted a few test shots which show no difference in the adjusters.
Alan

Notch 2 looks discernibly sharper to me.

[alanmcd]

Notch 2 looks discernibly sharper to me.

Seriously?

[RHITMrB]

Seriously?

Seriously. It's very subtle, but noticeable if you flip back and forth. Either case is about what I'd expect from my V700 at 2400dpi. Why are you expecting there to be a "world of difference?"

[alanmcd]

Seriously. It's very subtle, but noticeable if you flip back and forth. Either case is about what I'd expect from my V700 at 2400dpi. Why are you expecting there to be a "world of difference?"

Well, they are the extremes in height. If I can't see the extremes, then how would I discern each notch? But I've set the images up to click quickly between them and I cannot see any discernible difference. To be honest, If I'd named them in reverse by accident I'd never have been able to place them back again. Can you point out a small circle in the images where you consider a difference exists?
Alan

[RHITMrB]

Well, they are the extremes in height. If I can't see the extremes, then how would I discern each notch? But I've set the images up to click quickly between them and I cannot see any discernible difference. To be honest, If I'd named them in reverse by accident I'd never have been able to place them back again. Can you point out a small circle in the images where you consider a difference exists?
Alan

The extremes aren't that extreme, which is why some people benefit from the Betterscanning adjustable holders, which have a wider range and can be adjusted more finely. I don't and it doesn't look like you would either. Be happy with your results - they're good!

As I said, the difference is very subtle, but where I see it most is in the balconies (?) on the right edge of the image - the edges of the bright objects on them have marginally more contrast on 2 than on 5.


I'm pretty sure I didn't refer to anything Silverfast.

My point is that there is no focus control by the scanner; though Silverfast supports adjusting it on scanners that have it, it doesn't on ones that don't.

[mrred]

My point is that there is no focus control by the scanner; though Silverfast supports adjusting it on scanners that have it, it doesn't on ones that don't.

You speak of absolute certainty, as if you are an Epson scanner engineer. Vuescan has a control, which I adjust and the focus is adjusted.

Proving Silverfast is not absolutely knowledgeable is a trivial task. Put two supported scanners on the usb buss and their software does not work most of the time; mysteriously some times it's ok. I have a long email trail of them promising to fix it and they have yet to do....since version 6. Anything not to give my money back. At that time they didn't even support ICE on my Epson scanner that had ICE. Not having it listed (to me) simply means they don't or won't support that feature.

[cjdewey]

You speak of absolute certainty, as if you are an Epson scanner engineer. Vuescan has a control, which I adjust and the focus is adjusted.

I'm not an Epson engineer, so I may be doing it wrong, but there's a V850 on my desk, and the focus feature in Vuescan appears to be disabled. Aside from the two transparency mode settings, I haven't found any focus control in Silverfast or Epson Scan, either.
146545

[RHITMrB]

You speak of absolute certainty, as if you are an Epson scanner engineer. Vuescan has a control, which I adjust and the focus is adjusted.

Proving Silverfast is not absolutely knowledgeable is a trivial task. Put two supported scanners on the usb buss and their software does not work most of the time; mysteriously some times it's ok. I have a long email trail of them promising to fix it and they have yet to do....since version 6. Anything not to give my money back. At that time they didn't even support ICE on my Epson scanner that had ICE. Not having it listed (to me) simply means they don't or won't support that feature.

Okay, if you won't take my word for it, or Silverfast's, how about people in the business of making film holders for Epsons? http://scanscience.com/Pages/EpsonV750.html -"The Epson V750 / V700 have two fixed focus planes"

There's something to be said for the placebo effect. If adjusting a slider that isn't hooked up to anything makes you feel better about your scans, so be it! :)

[Kirk Gittings]

What ever you say, your great omnipotent lordship....ruler of the flat earth....

So I got this response from Ed Hamrick. The owner and software engineer at Vue Scan.

"VueScan only switches between the two fixed focus positions.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick"

[mrred]

I'm not an Epson engineer, so I may be doing it wrong, but there's a V850 on my desk, and the focus feature in Vuescan appears to be disabled. Aside from the two transparency mode settings, I haven't found any focus control in Silverfast or Epson Scan, either.
146545

It's in the input tab, further down.

[Kirk Gittings]

The scanner has electronic control over focus. Vuescan allows you to overside (adjust) this. I'm not sure why Epson Scan does not. I have no regard for Silverfast so I am not surprised.

You keep repeating this but it is simply not true. Vuescan does not have electronic control over focus with these Epsons. There is no focus control in these Epsons. I emailed Ed Hamrick, the owner and software engineer at Vuescan, and he confirmed that Vuescan only switches between the two fixed focus lenses.

[cjdewey]

It's in the input tab, further down.

Doesn't look like it; scrollbar doesn't go any further down: 146621146622

[alen]

You keep repeating this but it is simply not true. Vuescan does not have electronic control over focus with these Epsons. There is no focus control in these Epsons. I emailed Ed Hamrick, the owner and software engineer at Vuescan, and he confirmed that Vuescan only switches between the two fixed focus lenses.

Thanks for sharing Kirk.

[uphereinmytree]

I scan on an epson v750 with the basic software. emulsion side down on scanner glass with anti newton glass on top. flip it in photoshop then remove dust manually.

[sanking]

You keep repeating this but it is simply not true. Vuescan does not have electronic control over focus with these Epsons. There is no focus control in these Epsons. I emailed Ed Hamrick, the owner and software engineer at Vuescan, and he confirmed that Vuescan only switches between the two fixed focus lenses.

Just as Kirk keeps saying.

The Epson line of scanners that includes the V750 and V850 are able to switch between two fixed fixed focus lens, one with focus approximately on the bed of the scanner for scanning directly on the glass, the other with focus several millimeters above the glass for scanning with film holders. It does not matter which software you use, Vuescan, Epson Scan or Silverfast, none of them are capable of electronic focus control because there is no focusing adjustment built into the scanner for either of the two lenses. You choose one or the other, and that is the limit of your control.

Sandy

[alanmcd]

Well, I started this thread. I do thank everyone for their valuable input. I've chased all the issues to ground now. For those who hate Silverfast, I'm afraid it gets my vote. For colour, the iSRD is simply amazing for 50 year old family slides. These two photos are with and without iSRD and no other spot corrections have been done to either. I don't have to label them.

146712

146713

I've taken a scan of B&W 4x5" HP5Plus400 film through to a printer service and I'm very impressed with 20x30" final print. I doubt a drum scanner would improve it. So the V800 is all I need and it will save me a lot of money compared with scan services.
The final conclusion on focus is that V800 has only fixed focus with 2 lenses. The notched height adjusters on the film holders might deliver some improvement over the standard height (arrow notch) but for me and for the foreseeable future, I'll leave it where it is.
The batch mode is excellent but I suppose once all my old slides and negs are done, that feature will be used rarely. The 4x5 film holder is where it's at for me moving forward.
I also have my exif workflow all worked out with an android app called filmtag I can update the shutter and aperture data very quickly before I import and post process the scan.

thanks again
Alan

[Jeff T]

Alan,

This is a very nice family photo and you have made great progress removing dust particles with Silverfast. A proper drum scan will improve the shadow noise such as the hair of the person in the middle. It appears that the flatbed scanner struggled to distinguish between the dark hair against the lighter blue sky so it blended the two elements. This is where a drum scanner will surpass a flatbed scanner. The only drum scanners that are compatible with Silverfast is a Hell S3400 or Heidelberg Tango scanners, perhaps Aztek scanners but I don't have first hand experience with Howtek/Aztek scanners.

[Tyler Boley]

Howtek models are supported by Silverfast, at least the 4500. I use it all the time and have for years

[sanking]

Howtek models are supported by Silverfast, at least the 4500. I use it all the time and have for years

Several of the Howtek scanners are supported by Silverfast, including the D4000, 4500, 6500 and 7500.

The only downside is that Silverfast is not supported for MAC OS later than Tiger 10.4.1, it only works in 32 bit, and individual file size is limited to either 2 GB or 30,000 pixels in one dimension. I personally operate the 7500 with Silverfast 6.6 HDR on a very late model MAC G4 running OS 10.3.9, with an Acard AEC-6712WM SCSI card.

I have heard of people using Silverfast with the Mac Pro with OS 10.6.8 and I would love to be able to get that working, but the Silverfast driver would still limit file size to 2 GB and/or 30,000 pixels.

Sandy

[alen]

Thats really impressive work Alan, and thanks for sharing the before and after.

[onnect17]

Several of the Howtek scanners are supported by Silverfast, including the D4000, 4500, 6500 and 7500.

The only downside is that Silverfast is not supported for MAC OS later than Tiger 10.4.1, it only works in 32 bit, and individual file size is limited to either 2 GB or 30,000 pixels in one dimension. I personally operate the 7500 with Silverfast 6.6 HDR on a very late model MAC G4 running OS 10.3.9, with an Acard AEC-6712WM SCSI card.

I have heard of people using Silverfast with the Mac Pro with OS 10.6.8 and I would love to be able to get that working, but the Silverfast driver would still limit file size to 2 GB and/or 30,000 pixels.

Sandy

It also runs the HR8000, in Windows or Macs. The model number is listed as 5500. Not bad for $299. I recently purchased a license and works in both, the 4000 and the 4500.

[GG12]

Seem to recall some slide holders with V750 have different settings - either two or three heights, and you try different setting till you find the sharpness you like. Did this a few years ago, haven't looked at it since, so memory is foggy. And yes, in Epson software you have to dive in to zero out the settings, especially as it clips the highs and lows, and you have to reset the end points to keep all the info under the curve.

[Tyler Boley]

yes those are important considerations going in, setting up a system. SCSI adapters and/or PCI cards are important to investigate as well, getting rare or expensive. My 4500 is connected to an old G4 in the corner running Tiger, with an old PCI scsi card. It has not evolved since originally set up years ago, and does nothing but scan, when needed. It'll never change. So I'm also unaware of Silverfast and OSX version issues.


Several of the Howtek scanners are supported by Silverfast, including the D4000, 4500, 6500 and 7500.

The only downside is that Silverfast is not supported for MAC OS later than Tiger 10.4.1, it only works in 32 bit, and individual file size is limited to either 2 GB or 30,000 pixels in one dimension. I personally operate the 7500 with Silverfast 6.6 HDR on a very late model MAC G4 running OS 10.3.9, with an Acard AEC-6712WM SCSI card.

I have heard of people using Silverfast with the Mac Pro with OS 10.6.8 and I would love to be able to get that working, but the Silverfast driver would still limit file size to 2 GB and/or 30,000 pixels.

Sandy

[vuescan]

Just looking through these comments... am happy to see VueScan mentioned. If I can assist in anyway just let me know.. thanks :-)

[vuescan]

Hi - just to give you some information about VueScan... VueScan assumes that the film is off the glass when it’s being scanned – this is true of all the Epson film holders so VueScan sets the focus position to “off the glass”.

On the glass scanning causes Newton rings – it’s not a good idea.

We could easily modify VueScan to let people set the focus position manually, but we don't think it would be very useful. But we are always open to any ideas and suggestions from our customers... :-)

Thank you :-)
Beverley.

Director of Marketing - VueScan
www.hamrick.com

[Jim Andrada]

Doesn't that only work when scanning in the high resolution area? 8 x 10 with film area guide would be on the glass.

[vuescan]

Hi -

I am responsible for the marketing of VueScan - apologies but I am not technical but I wonder if this will help?

We have just released VueScan 9.5.43 with the capability to vary the focus position.

Set “Input | Auto focus” to “Manual”, then set “Input | Focus”
to “0” to focus just above the glass and set “Input | Focus”
to “1” to focus 2.5 mm above the glass.

These are the only two settings that do anything with Epson flatbeds.

Please feel free to ask any questions or just test VueScan directly...

Many thanks, Beverley.

[Tin Can]

Good news. I will try this today.

Does it work on 7xx and 8xx?

Also does this mean Vuescan is more than one person? I have wondered how this great software will persevere when the inevitable occurs.

[sanking]

To be clear, the Vuescan 9.5.43 release does not add any additional functionality to the actual focusing mechanism of the Epson 700/750 and 800 scanners.

Setting the Input Focus to "0" in Vuescan does the same thing as choosing film area guide in the Epson software. Either sets the focus to just above the glass.

and

Setting the Input Focus to "1" in Vuescan does the same thing as choosing film holder in the Epson software. Either sets the focus to about 2.5 mm above the glass.

Thanks,

Sandy






Hi -

I am responsible for the marketing of VueScan - apologies but I am not technical but I wonder if this will help?

We have just released VueScan 9.5.43 with the capability to vary the focus position.

Set “Input | Auto focus” to “Manual”, then set “Input | Focus”
to “0” to focus just above the glass and set “Input | Focus”
to “1” to focus 2.5 mm above the glass.

These are the only two settings that do anything with Epson flatbeds.

Please feel free to ask any questions or just test VueScan directly...

Many thanks, Beverley.

[JaZ99]

>>I can also confirm that even though luminous landscape says he can see the difference and set the shims to his desired height, I cannot for the life of me see any difference at all.<<

If you can't see any difference in sharpness between the highest setting and the lowest setting, something is definitely wrong. I get this question occasionally and the most common reason this occurs is because the user is not using (and double checking right before clicking the scan button) the "film with film holder" setting in the software. If you are utilizing the wrong lens then things are so far from optimum that no adjustment of the film holder height will help.

Doug

There is a simple way to test the holder height in more objective way. It requires some work, though.

What I did:

1. I downloaded and printed Norman Koren's resolution target (http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF5.html)
2. I took a picture of the target with the best lens I own using optimal aperture and developed the negative
3. I scanned the negative using different height setting and calculate the MTF value as Norman described

For each height setting there was huge difference in numbers, but negligible difference in picture quality.

JaZ

[vuescan]

Hi Randy,

Thanks for getting back to us and I will contact Ed and pass on some of these comments / questions and get a response for you.

VueScan: Yes, Ed Hamrick ran the technical side by himself for a long time, but his son now works with him and is a partner. I have looked after the marketing for a long time - but have focused on working with the manufacturers and other activities, so we don't do much 'visible' marketing - ie advertising. so yes - we are a very small team (but work long hours!) However, we do always like to hear from customers and we try and implement their requests - so feel free to email me any suggestions etc. Thanks - Beverley.

[vuescan]

Hi Sandy,


Yes, it’s the same focusing mechanism as is used in Epson Scan.

Beverley.

[vuescan]

To be clear, the Vuescan 9.5.43 release does not add any additional functionality to the actual focusing mechanism of the Epson 700/750 and 800 scanners.

Setting the Input Focus to "0" in Vuescan does the same thing as choosing film area guide in the Epson software. Either sets the focus to just above the glass.

and

Setting the Input Focus to "1" in Vuescan does the same thing as choosing film holder in the Epson software. Either sets the focus to about 2.5 mm above the glass.

Thanks,

Sandy

Hi Sandy



Yes, it’s the same focusing mechanism as is used in Epson Scan.

Thanks
Beverley

[vuescan]

Good news. I will try this today.

Does it work on 7xx and 8xx?

Also does this mean Vuescan is more than one person? I have wondered how this great software will persevere when the inevitable occurs.

Yes - it works on 755 and 8xx, and it’s the same focusing mechanism as is used
in Epson Scan.

Thanks
Beverley