Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Deer Gunter
Well, alomst 5 years later ... can I still throw in a couple of questions? I will begin to try and master an iQsmart3 and its oXYgen scan software somewhere in the next couple of weeks, and stumbled upon this page while Googling. It's my first post on LFP by the way :-)
I already have some experience with the iQsmart, but it is only now I will be able to study it properly. An example:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/thedeergunter/6250812458/
1) Does the geometrical distortion affect image quality in any other way? I'm particularly concerned about loss of sharpness.
2) Is it inevitably inherent to each and every belt driven scanner, even when you're talking about a brand new out of the box device?
3) Does recalibration have an influence on the degree of distortion?
Thanks for your time! Cheers.
What scanner is not belt driven?
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koh303
What scanner is not belt driven?
SURF mentioned a couple of them earlier in this thread ... "Tango, Scitex Smart 3XX, Topaz, Nexscan", and likely some of the Nikon scanners as well.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Deer Gunter
SURF mentioned a couple of them earlier in this thread ... "Tango, Scitex Smart 3XX, Topaz, Nexscan", and likely some of the Nikon scanners as well.
I have not yet seen a seitex or nikon scanner not belt driven. The Tango and others are drum scanners.
Scanners with step motors are prone to the same questions you raise BTW.
Even an imacon has 2 drive belts. They are steel reinforced belts. When they fail, the machine does not work, but it does not happen over time. It either works or it does not, as is the case with all others.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koh303
Scanners with step motors are prone to the same questions you raise BTW.
Hi,
I raised the questions because someone (SURF) raised the issue, being 'there is a fundamental difference between belt driven scanners opposite lead screw driven scanners causing the former to generate geometrical distortions'. Apart from the fact which scanner uses which system, do you doubt this statement, or not? I'm just interested knowing the limitations of each system.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Deer Gunter
Hi,
I raised the questions because someone (SURF) raised the issue, being 'there is a fundamental difference between belt driven scanners opposite lead screw driven scanners causing the former to generate geometrical distortions'. Apart from the fact which scanner uses which system, do you doubt this statement, or not? I'm just interested knowing the limitations of each system.
Instead of breaking your noodle over this theoretical maybe, you should tell us what scanners you are considering.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koh303
Instead of breaking your noodle over this theoretical maybe, you should tell us what scanners you are considering.
I agree. In the next couple of weeks I'll have the privilege to have permanent access to a Creo iQsmart3 scanner at home. I came to this thread while Googling. The claimed distortions are illustrated at the very beginning of this thread using ... indeed, the iQsmart3.
Thanks for your opinion.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koh303
Instead of breaking your noodle over this theoretical maybe, you should tell us what scanners you are considering.
And then all became quiet ...
Allow me to answer my own questions then, and that of many others I suppose.
I installed a Creo iQsmart3 from scratch: yesterday the hardware part, today the software part. All went well. I also went through a couple of (6x7) test scans. And I can tell you this:
There is not one sign of geometrical distortion on my samples. You can perfectly overlay two consecutive scans without moving one pixel! My faith in belt drive scanners is restored completely.
So what went wrong with the scans posted on the Collaborative Large Format Scanner Comparison?
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...n-comparison/#
I can only guess someone is either ...
- using the wrong Mac (iMac, Mac mini, MacBooks of any kind are not compatible with iQsmart scanners).
- using a messed up Mac OS X. Updating the OS over the internet causes the entire scanner installation to become invalid, and requires a reconfiguration from zero, including recalibrating the device!
- using the scanner while actively connected to a network.
- using a scanner that needs recalibration.
... or a combination of the above.
I have used a G5 MacBook Pro (ppc) before with the iQsmart3 and also experienced deformations. I was sceptical at first, but the difference using a G4 PowerMac (tower) is clear. They make a much better couple now.
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Well, that's good news. Happy scanning!
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peter J. De Smidt
Well, that's good news. Happy scanning!
Happy scanning to you too :-)
Re: Geometrical distortions on belt drive scanners
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Deer Gunter
I also went through a couple of (6x7) test scans. And I can tell you this:
There is not one sign of geometrical distortion on my samples. You can perfectly overlay two consecutive scans without moving one pixel! My faith in belt drive scanners is restored completely.
If you compared "two consecutive scans" that's you compared repeatability. It's often very high and it's another animal. But faith is a good thing to have.
PS. I have restored the images from 2011. Some years passed and they disappeared.