Scitex Eversmart Pro DPI Limitations

[noisegate]

Good Morning,

I need the expert assistance of all you Eversmart Pro users. I recently acquired an Eversmart Pro running the Scitex 2.5.1 software. After calibration, the first few test scans look great. Problem is, the maximum DPI setting in the software is 2540. I was under the impression the Pro series had a maximum DPI of 3150. I have fiddled with the settings (No software manual) thinking something within the software was limiting the dpi. No success. I am operating blind at this point and am hoping someone has a suggestion or two or at least software documentation that may be helpful.

I much appreciate your time.

Maddie

[Ari]

I've never used the ES Pro beyond the 2540 dpi limit, but a while back I was told you could get more out of it by using the zoom/magnification slider.
I'm sure Pali and others will give much better replies, but you can start by playing with that function.

[noisegate]

Hi Ari,

Thank you so much for your response. I have not yet fiddled with the zoom/magnification slider. You can be sure it will be the first thing I try this evening.

Thanks again!

[Ari]

My pleasure, Maddie.
I also found this in an old email: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/39298453/eversmart-scanners-kodak
It's the ES Pro User Guide; there may be some more useful information in there.

And more good news from my email archives, a quote from forum member Pali K:

The software is misleading because the software itself is maxing at 2450 DPI not the scanner.
In order to get the full 3175 DPI, you simply need to set your DPI to 2450 and change the enlargement to 129%.
You can set the enlargement upto 8200 DPI but anything over 3175 will be interpolated.

There you go! Glad I kept some of these old emails. :)

[noisegate]

Ari - You are a hero! Not sure how often I would use the full 3175 dpi, but it was bugging the heck out of me. Thank you also for the link. I believe I read somewhere (most likely on this forum) that the software was not very intuitive. I have to agreed. Still, I am loving this machine and greatly appreciate your assistance.

[Pali K]

Maddie,

You may even be able to get a bit more resolution than 3175 depending on how clean the lense and mirror is in the unit. If everything is working as is, I wouldn't recommend tinkering with anything since it can be a very complex process.

Btw, an easier way to change DPI is to just type over the setting using your number keys :) It's not intuitive at all but works perfectly fine.

Also as FYI, I have a quick color negative scanning tutorial with this scanner on my blog at http://www.analogfilm.camera

Enjoy your scanner. It's a stunning machine that competes with high end drum scanners but learning the software can be a painful experience.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Regards,

Pali

[Ari]

Maddie, I owe it all to Pali; he really helped me a lot when I first got the ES Pro.
Pali, thanks for the link to the tutorial, it's great to have as another resource.

[noisegate]

Good Morning! Looks like I now have two Heroes! Thank you Pali for jumping in. I did read your article a couple days ago while lurking about the internet in an attempt to find an answer. Well written and very informative - thank you for your efforts and willingness to share them.

I have printed out the manual from the link provided by Ari and have already found it very useful. My scanning experience is limited to a Nikon and a very, very old Screen drum scanner. Compared to the drum scanner, this unit is an absolute joy!

There still are a couple things I need to sort out. First, what are you guys using for film masks? My unit came with a couple sets of 35 mm masks of which I have no use (if anyone would want these, please contact me and I would be happy to send them your way). So far, I have used black construction paper to block out the light - not very scientific but that is what I had on hand. Second, given the amount of dust and scratches that appeared on my first scan, I may want to try oil mounting. I am guessing this is possible if I tape off a "tray" on the glass and proceed carefully so as not to flood the area. Am I way off on this assumption? Hopefully, this doesn't sound incredibly naive. I know they made a special oil mounting platform but I suspect those are extremely rare to come by so DIY it is...

Again, thank you both for your time, expertise and willingness to share. It is greatly appreciated!

M

[Ari]

Maddie, I don't think the ES Pro is made for wet scanning; I seem to recall Michael Streeter at Genesis telling me as much a couple years ago.
And you can buy masks from Michael, I think they're $40/ea. but don't quote me on that.
If it's possible, I'd look at cutting your 35mm masks into the formats you need, i.e., cut the 35mm slots into one 8x10 area.
You can use the 8x10 cut-out for 4x5 and 5x7 as well as 120.
Search recent threads for the ES Pro, one from not too long ago was asking about mask material.
Keep us posted.

[noisegate]

I wasn't too sure if wet scanning was a viable option - or one that is even necessary. That said, if I can't wet scan the negatives, my only other option in an effort to limit the amount of dust would be to improve my housekeeping skills. Looks like I'm going to learn to appreciate dust specs. Adding to my list of research....masks and dust remediation. Again, thank you both for sharing your knowledge - truly a gift!

I'll let you know how things go!
M

[Jim Andrada]

I have the IQSMART but I think they both work the same way wrt wet scanning. There's a mounting station and basically the top glass comes out and gets placed in the mounting station where you wet mount. I think in the old days they'd have 2 or 3 glass panels per machine and someone would be mounting on one panel and then the panel would get swapped with the one in the machine. So no wet mounting would happen on the scanner itself. The top glass panel in my scanner has a handle at each end and this was how they've carry them around

[noisegate]

Hi Jim,

I would love to try the mounting station (I'm not 100% positive they were made for the ES Pro). Trouble is I don't think there are too many around and the price might be a bit over my budget so hence my quest for a DIY solution (other than improving my housekeeping skills). So far no luck on my research so it sounds like I need to bust out the vacuum and get to work. Regardless, it is good to hear that 2 or 3 of these were used to increase shop production as I now have hope that more that a few of them are still around. Even if it doesn't work on my scanner, I will keep an eye out for one as I can easily see myself upgrading to the Pro II or Supreme sometime down the road. Have I mentioned yet that I absolutely love this thing?

Thanks!
M

[Pali K]

Hi Maddie,

The Eversmart and JAZZ scanners all use the same glass. They did make a very nice wet mounting station for these scanners but I really don't think you need it. Invest in anti static scanner wipes and a good oil-free air compressor and you'll do much better with dust and with very little effort. The way these scanners are designed, you also don't have to worry about the typical newton ring issues. The only thing you are possible missing with dry mounting is the benefit of hiding film scratches that wet mounting helps with.

If you are curious about the wet mounting station, check out this youtube video that shows what the setup looks like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvXW7ZG2b6o

Regards,

Pali

[Pali K]

BTW, just as a caution make sure the handles are still glued firmly to the scanner glass before you attempt to take the glass out.

Pali

[Jim Andrada]

Michael streeter has them. The mounting station as I recall is in the neighborhood of $1k, the glass panels are more reasonable. Not sure these numbers are correct - just what I sort of remember from talking to him when I got my IQSmart.

Edit

Found the e-mail - he quoted $1k for the mounting station, but he really doesn't think it's necessary

[sanking]

Hi Maddie,

The Eversmart and JAZZ scanners all use the same glass. They did make a very nice wet mounting station for these scanners but I really don't think you need it.
.......
Regards,

Pali

Perhaps I am mistaken but my understanding is that the glass of Eversmart scanners has an anti-reflection coating, and that of the JAZZ scanners is plain glass. You can fluid mount on either surface, but the anti-reflection coating of the Eversmart is very thin and may suffer scratch marks when cleaning the fluid from the glass.

When I worked with the Eversmart Pro I owned two glass beds and used the one with abraded anti-reflection coating for fluid mounting. The fluid basically fills in the scratches on both negatives/transparencies and on the scanner glass. I also owned a fluid mounting station with a glass bed, but did not use it very much since I found it very easy to just fluid mount on the regular glass.

The Eversmart literature that I have seen recommends fluid mounting only with magnification of 8X or more. I personally fluid mounted virtually every negative I scanned since I never saw a drawback in doing so, and in many cases the fluid mount was superior in terms of contrast, grain smoothing and/or eliminating the appearance of dust and debris.

For securing the negative to the glass I used 3-M blue line masking type, same type you can buy at Home Depot or Lowes.

With regard to the ppi limitation of the Eversmart Pro, it is 3275 ppi, and it is the only scanner I ever tested with a resolution target that actually exceeded the advertised resolution.

Sandy

[Jim Andrada]

The way Michael explained it to me is that the glass for the IQSmart 3 is ANR and the glass for the others is an etched (maybe that's what you meant by abraded???) surface. Which I guess would also be sort of ANR. I don't know if there's different glass for the Eversmart, but I sort of doubt it - I'll check with Michael. I wonder if the glass for the mounting station might be different?

[sanking]

The way Michael explained it to me is that the glass for the IQSmart 3 is ANR and the glass for the others is an etched (maybe that's what you meant by abraded???) surface. Which I guess would also be sort of ANR. I don't know if there's different glass for the Eversmart, but I sort of doubt it - I'll check with Michael. I wonder if the glass for the mounting station might be different?

What I meant by abraded was that the anti-reflection coating on the surface of the Eversmart base glass had been scratched/marked from repeated cleaning. The coating is very thin, like the coating on a lens. The anti-newton glass of the Eversmart is the top glass that contacts the film when the lid is closed. I don't know about the IQSmart but am fairly certain that the base glass of the JAZZ does not have the anti-reflection coating.

I am fairly certain that the Eversmart fluid mounting adaptor had a glass bed with no coating as it would not have been necessary when fluid mounting. Course, if you buy a used one the glass could have been broken and replaced.

Sandy

[SergeyT]

>> IQSmart 3 is ANR and the glass for the others is an etched

Only Jazz and Jazz+ were sold with the ANR (etched) base glass (~$500 a piece). The same type of glass was sold with fluid mounting station. The rest of Eversmart scanners were sold with coated base glass (~$900 a piece).
Both can be used for fluid-mounted scanning, and none actually requires the mounting station. Kami supplies(fluid and tape) are the way to go.

SergeyT

[Jim Andrada]

I heard back from Michael Streeter as follows

Good Morning James,

While the glass of the iQsmart and Eversmart look similar, they are different and cannot be used interchangeably. The iQsmart scanner glass is slightly larger than that of the Eversmart and the handle positions on the glasses are different between the two series of scanners.

There are two different glasses for both the iQsmart and the Eversmart scanners; one is AN and the other is AR.

The AR glass is coated on both sides to prevent glare when scanning dry material. The AN glass is etched and has no coating and is used primarily for wet mounting, but can also be used for dry mounting too.

While you could wet mount on both glasses, it is highly recommended to use only the AN glass. Because the AR glass is coated, mounting fluid can permeate this coating and erode it. It also makes cleaning the glass very difficult.

The AN glass is not coated and, therefore, is perfect for oil mounting. The etching of the AN glass does not effect the quality of the scan yet protects from Newton rings.

There is some confusion because some scanners were sold with AN glass (iQsmart1, iQsmart2 and Eversmart Jazz series) as a standard; these scanners were not equipped AR glass like the other models. I am not necessarily clear on why SCITEX/CREO designed these specific scanners with the AN glass as the standard; I can only assume it was based on price. I believe their thought was to produce an all around scanner that offered all the quality of the top tier scanners, but at a more appealing price point. I have actually tested the AN glass against the AR glass, in dry scanning, and I cannot see any discernible difference in quality.

Jim, in your case, the iQsmart2 has the AN glass as a standard. You can either use it for dry or wet mounting.

I hope this explanation helps and does not cause more confusion.

Best Regards,
Michael

And I asked him about whether the upper glass was ANR

Yes it is. Also, when oil mounting, the user usually receives a set of small stick-on bumpers as part of the oil mounting kit. These bumpers are approximate 1/4” high and one should be stuck on each of the corners of the base glass. This keeps the upper glass from making contact with the oil mounted content to prevent Newton rings or other anomalies.

Best Regards,
Michael

[noisegate]

BTW, just as a caution make sure the handles are still glued firmly to the scanner glass before you attempt to take the glass out.

Pali

Sounds like someone has a story to tell?

[noisegate]

Perhaps I am mistaken but my understanding is that the glass of Eversmart scanners has an anti-reflection coating, and that of the JAZZ scanners is plain glass. You can fluid mount on either surface, but the anti-reflection coating of the Eversmart is very thin and may suffer scratch marks when cleaning the fluid from the glass.

When I worked with the Eversmart Pro I owned two glass beds and used the one with abraded anti-reflection coating for fluid mounting. The fluid basically fills in the scratches on both negatives/transparencies and on the scanner glass. I also owned a fluid mounting station with a glass bed, but did not use it very much since I found it very easy to just fluid mount on the regular glass.

The Eversmart literature that I have seen recommends fluid mounting only with magnification of 8X or more. I personally fluid mounted virtually every negative I scanned since I never saw a drawback in doing so, and in many cases the fluid mount was superior in terms of contrast, grain smoothing and/or eliminating the appearance of dust and debris.

For securing the negative to the glass I used 3-M blue line masking type, same type you can buy at Home Depot or Lowes.

With regard to the ppi limitation of the Eversmart Pro, it is 3275 ppi, and it is the only scanner I ever tested with a resolution target that actually exceeded the advertised resolution.

Sandy

Hi Sandy,

You bring up a couple very interesting points. I did notice my scanner glass has very small but visible scratches. I have not yet scanned enough to tell if these scratches are appearing and/or affecting the scans but I imagine they must degrade the picture somewhat due to their proximity to the film. Also, the grain! I could not believe how much grain appeared in the dry scan. I have played with the grain settings in the extended sharpness window and have yet to find the sweet spot. Perhaps fluid mounting may help in this respect as I have never had similar results with my fluid mounted 6x7 negs made via a Nikon scanner.

Maddie

[noisegate]

Michael streeter has them. The mounting station as I recall is in the neighborhood of $1k, the glass panels are more reasonable. Not sure these numbers are correct - just what I sort of remember from talking to him when I got my IQSmart.

Edit

Found the e-mail - he quoted $1k for the mounting station, but he really doesn't think it's necessary


Hi Jim,

Thanks for the tip. I originally thought the mounting station was the only "safe" way to fluid mount the negatives onto the scanner. Since then, I have read the manual, and of course, listened to everyone on this forum and now have to agree with the legendary man himself, Micheal - I don't think it is necessary. Still, if I found one within my budget (considerably south of $1k), I would most likely snag it.

Maddie

[Jim Andrada]

Even if I found one I wouldn't have any place to put it!!! Unless my wife would let me keep it on top of her Grand piano. Any guesses as to the likelihood of that happening????

[noisegate]

Even if I found one I wouldn't have any place to put it!!! Unless my wife would let me keep it on top of her Grand piano. Any guesses as to the likelihood of that happening????

Piano-Schmiano. Buy her a banjo and use the extra space for more "important things." Oh, and you might want to hold on to the proceeds from selling the piano in order to pay for the divorce attorney...

[Jim Andrada]

Actually she has two full size grand pianos. She was a concert pianist until her hands gave out. And she lets me park my changing tent under one of them so I don't have to set it up every time I need to load film. I think it's because it acts as a bit of a sound absorber and cuts down on unwanted reverberations. But no way I can put anything on top.