PDA

View Full Version : The "New" IQsmart2 has arrived



Jim Andrada
6-Oct-2016, 18:29
I bought it as a complete refurb from Michael at Genesis and had it delivered to a friend's business because there's no way a freight truck could possibly make it up my driveway - some drivers can't get their cars up here either and my wife has to go get them at the street and drive them up and down. I had someone available to help me move it yesterday afternoon so I went and picked it up and a couple of hours later it was in its new home. Putting it in place was uneventful and with two people it was only a 20 minute job.

I'd done a lot of homework re the physical size and weight and while i waited for it to ship I built a cabinet to hold it along with my 4880. The shelves for both printer and scanner pull out almost 30 inches - actually about two inches clear of the cabinet. I used drawer slides rated for 150 - 175 pounds per pair and built a rotating platform on top of each shelf - you always need to get to the back of these things for something - be it attaching cables or clearing a printer jam or looking up a serial number or whatever, so designing the shelves to rotate was a priority. In order to be sure everything would operate as planned, I modeled the cabinet and the machines in Rhinocerous and animated the model in Cinema 4D to be sure there'd be no interference.

And guess what - it all operates as planned. Must be dumb luck (not!) I use an old MacBook to drive the scanner and it seems to run the latest oXYgen quite well and the nice part is that the computer sits on top of the scanner when everything is pushed into the cabinet, and I can drop the computer onto my desk top to operate the scanner from my office chair.

A few photos

155875155876155877155878

Software installation seemed to go OK, but oXYgen reported errors at startup, so I contacted Michael and discovered that I needed to run the installation utility that would scan the calibration target and run diagnostics and build a series of control tables. So I ran the utility and it failed on the optical test. I noticed that a web browser was running so I terminated it and shut sown networking and reran the utilities successfully. It took about 40 minutes or so to complete the control table build.

OK, time to try a scan. A bit confusing going through the menus the first time (heck it's still confusing on the 7th or 8th try) but after a bit of trial and error I got a rather nice scan of a 4 x 5. I have a lot more work ahead of me to get fully up the learning curve, but I sent a copy of the scan to a friend who knows nothing about scanners etc. I had previously sent him an Epson 750 scan of the same negative. He immediately saw an improvement in the handling of details, particularly in the shadows. jpeg to follow as soon as I shrink it enough to fit the forum requirements. Scan was at 4300dpi.

Peter De Smidt
6-Oct-2016, 18:35
Good stuff, Jim. I hope you get many years of good use out of the scanner.

Jim Andrada
6-Oct-2016, 18:40
And here's the scan as cropped in Photoshop. Picture is our front "yard"

155879

Jim Andrada
6-Oct-2016, 18:45
Thanks Peter

I'm sure the scanner is good for a lot of years to come. Not sure I can say the same about myself though. I'll be 76 in a couple of weeks and I have a fusion of 4 lumbar vertebrae scheduled in mid November. I'm sure my wife really wants to inherit an IQsmart (NOT!) I think I'll be limited to using a box Brownie or some such thing for quite a few week. Maybe a good chance to get to know the Minox better!

But not giving up yet - I had the surgery delayed to November so I can take Mark Nelson's "Precision Digital Negative/Platinum Printing" workshop week after next. Flying and standing up for the workshop is going to be pretty uncomfortable but so what. Biggest issue is that I think I'm walking like a bent-over penguin.

Pali K
6-Oct-2016, 19:09
Congrats Jim! You'll be enjoying this for sure :)

Ari
6-Oct-2016, 19:11
Jim, congratulations! Nice cabinet build, too.
Everything will look good scanned on the Creo, and the ease of use is its second-best asset.

Jim Andrada
6-Oct-2016, 21:13
Thanks guys! I have to figure out how to make and use masks. I got a 4 x 5 mask with it that hold 6 negatives. I want to make a mask that will take a roll of 120. I know I can define "windows that will line up over each frame, just no idea (yet) how to do it.

I spent a lot of time figuring out how I'd be able to store and use the scanner easily and came up with the cabinet design.

B.S.Kumar
6-Oct-2016, 23:51
The lazy susan on the sliding shelf is a great idea. I'm vaguely thinking of getting an iQSmart again, and I'll keep this in mind.
You might want to get anti-static dust covers for the printer and scanner.

Kumar

Jim Andrada
7-Oct-2016, 00:25
I have the scanner cover. I use large cartridges in the printer so the nice Tumi custom cover I had for it won't fit. It's actually a bit more tricky than just using the lazy susan. Most of them aren't rated for heavy weights - I found one that was intended for these new giant TV's and had a 500 pound weight rating. I also added small glides under the rotating part so if the weight wasn't centered the support would stay quite level. The drawer slides need to be heavy duty as well. I used 1" thick MDF as the rotating platform and the drawer itself is built as a torsion box, ie the top is 17 mm plywood and there are several 3" pieces of 17mm ply on edge under the top surface, and on the bottom is a piece of 1/4 inch plywood the same size as the top. This is a VERY stiff construction and it isn't going to sag in the middle over a few years like a lot of shelves do. Unfortunately each shelf assembly weighs in at close to 45 pounds before adding the scanner or printer so the total for each shelf is pretty close to 150 pounds. I figure all loaded up the cabinet with contents weighs in around 600 pounds. There are also four cooling fans at the back of the scanner area to maintain airflow for the scanner.

Ari
7-Oct-2016, 07:10
Jim, I've made only one mask so far, for 8x10.
I also use it for 4 4x5s or a roll of 120. So far I haven't needed to cut another mask.
Film lays right on the bed and I close the lid, the scanner does the rest.

Jim Andrada
7-Oct-2016, 16:05
Do you tape the film to the mask or did you make the opening a tad larger than the film so the mask acts as a guide to position the film? The 4 x 5 mask that i got with the scanner has holes that are slightly smaller than the film size so I have to tape the film onto the mask and then put the mask (with film) over the locating pins. A little bit of a PITA, but not so hard. I'm pretty sure the scanner bed is ANR glass so should cause no issue with Newton's Rings - which seems to be your experience.

Jim Andrada
7-Oct-2016, 23:30
First results

I've started re-scanning the photos I took this past April in Japan with the 4 x 5 Technika/Ilford FP4+.

Day and Night. Can't believe I waited so long to upgrade from the Epson (which for what it, is a really good price performer unless you're as crazy as i am about shadow detail and texture.

155917

Ari
8-Oct-2016, 06:06
Do you tape the film to the mask or did you make the opening a tad larger than the film so the mask acts as a guide to position the film? The 4 x 5 mask that i got with the scanner has holes that are slightly smaller than the film size so I have to tape the film onto the mask and then put the mask (with film) over the locating pins. A little bit of a PITA, but not so hard. I'm pretty sure the scanner bed is ANR glass so should cause no issue with Newton's Rings - which seems to be your experience.

No, I don't tape, I just lay the film on the bed.
To cut out the 8x10 mask, I used an old sheet of 8x10 film, and cut 1mm extra on each side.
Yes, it's more of a guide, but I find it's the simplest and easiest way to work and still get excellent results.

Evanjoe610
11-Oct-2016, 19:38
Jim,

Congratulations on you IQSmart2 scanner. Michael Streeter is a True Gem of a Gentleman. I use an Eversmart Pro II on 2.6.3 for now. However i WOULD had not confine the scanner to a very tight cabinet as you had illustrated, solely for airflow and and now hearing of your back issue. I bought a sturdy shop workbench that i flat and has ample room for airflow. I have my two scanners mounted on top of the counter. My Imacon Precision III and the Eversmart Pro II. I also have the Eversmart Oil Mount Kit, ready for any highly detail scanning, but never found the need to use it it.


You can cut you own mask from a blank Precision Register punch mask or buy the Mix Multi-Mask from Michael. At one point I use to use Ruby Litho tape to tape down my film, but its getting harder to find so I do my best to position in a quadrant that ia can Define Mask by position (X & Y Coordinates) when setting it up.

Good Luck and enjoy this scanner. It is capable of doing fine work and I would not trade or sell mine scanner. The drum scanner delivers the best result, but at a huge cost factor or ROOM, SPARE PARTS, and Repair service.

Evan

Jim Andrada
11-Oct-2016, 21:01
Thanks Evan.

It's hard to see in the picture but there's a bank of cooling fans in the back of the cabinet. I usually just pull the shelf out and let it sit out in the open while it's running.

cdavis324
12-Oct-2016, 14:39
Do you guys really not see a difference between wet/dry mounting? I find a huge difference in dust, and a small difference in sharpness, so I almost always wet mount. With really dense negs I also mask around the image because there can be flare that only shows up when you start tweaking in ps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jim Andrada
12-Oct-2016, 16:28
I wet scanned 100% on the Epson and will probably give it a try on the IQsmart, but so far the dry scans are quite acceptable - wet scan might be better, but I'm not sure any improvement would be worth it. I guess I'll find out.

Ari
12-Oct-2016, 18:19
I haven't felt the need to wet-mount on my scanner (Eversmart Pro); it may be unsuited to such a purpose, anyway.
But when I used a V750, I never saw any difference between wet and dry scans, except that for dry scans I had to remove dust, whereas with wet scans I had to get rid of those annoying air bubbles.
I chose dust.

Jim Andrada
12-Oct-2016, 18:39
The greatest thing Photoshop has done in years is the spot healing brush IMHO used to take forever to spot a neg, now it's minutes. (Either way is better than the old red rouge-y stuff that used to come in a tiny bottle.

Evanjoe610
14-Oct-2016, 04:27
I agree with Ari. With your film probably not being any bigger than 4X5, you would be HARD press to tell the difference between Non-Oil Mounted scan versus an Oil Mounted scan.

If you are scanning anything better than 4X5, then that is where it will show greater detail. Your final scan will of be dependent on a Perfectly exposed image.

There would be a better final image also if you re going to have a big enlargement of a 35mm scan.

AS for dust, why not invest in a small Sears Compressor with an air spray nozzle? That was how we manage the dust and dirt at the mount mounting moment. That was of course when we had (6) Crosfield Drum Scanners in a raised temperature controlled room.

For home use, I use the following product:

Metro Vacuum ED500P DataVac 500-Watt, .75-HP Electric Duster

Micro Vacuum Attachment Kit - 7 Piece Kit

These two items purchased off Amazon for $64..




I haven't felt the need to wet-mount on my scanner (Eversmart Pro); it may be unsuited to such a purpose, anyway.
But when I used a V750, I never saw any difference between wet and dry scans, except that for dry scans I had to remove dust, whereas with wet scans I had to get rid of those annoying air bubbles.
I chose dust.

Peter De Smidt
14-Oct-2016, 07:44
In my opinion wet mounting gives the biggest difference with smaller film, as that's likely to be enlarged more. Grain rendition is finer with wet-mounting. Do you make prints big enough to see grain from your LF negs?

Jim Andrada
14-Oct-2016, 09:06
For most things I like to print at 6.5 x 8.5 to 11 x 14 whether it's from a 4 x 5 or a 5 x 7 or a whole plate negative. Occasional 16 x 20 for an exhibition but not many. Sometimes small is better - heck if it feels right I'll print an 8 x 10 neg at whole plate size. Dust is not a huge problem for me.

I went to a mixed exhibit of Lyonel Feninger's painting and photography once and there were a lot of surprisingly effective 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 prints om large mattes - maybe 13 x 19 (I'm guessing)