PDA

View Full Version : New Silverfast feature in 6.5 - Multi Exposure Scanning



Henry Ambrose
13-Dec-2006, 12:25
The update to version 6.5 of Silverfast has some new features. More Negafix profiles are included in the update.

This new feature in particular looks interesting as a way to get more out of your scanner:

http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html

Anyone tried this yet?

Walter Calahan
13-Dec-2006, 13:20
I've got it for my Epson V750 but haven't tried it yet. Tomorrow!

Kirk Gittings
13-Dec-2006, 14:07
I've had it for about a week and a half now. The new profiles don't exite me, but that may be my problem, read below, For instance I was using a tweaked NPS profile for 160S, but the new 160S profile doesn't seem any better. I am beginning to think that this is because I shoot 160S at EI 100 instead of the 160 it is profiled at and the 2/3 stop difference causes a color shift that is inconsistent with the profile. Their profiles almost always generate too much magenta in the blues. This is correctable by tweaking the profile in Negafix and saving it but I always wonder what a really bang on profile would do.

The multiscan feature appears to be a big improvement but still there are problems with the consistency of passes with the 750 as did the 4990 and 4870. The scanner has to be warm (fresh from a "dummy" scan) otherwise subsequent passes may be enough out of size to defeat the registration program. In otherwords the software appears to work great, but the hardware is still lacking. The 750 is actually sloppier than the 4990 was.

Doug Fisher
14-Dec-2006, 07:45
It appears that if you if registered your copy of Silverfast prior to Nov. 1, you are going to have to pay to upgrade to 6.5.

"To update your SilverFast software bought prior to Nov. 1st, 2006 to SilverFast 6.5, please visit our shop."

and...

"Up to version 6.4.4r7 you are allowed to download all updates for free after having registered your serial number on our website."

Doug
---
www.BetterScanning.com

Henry Ambrose
18-Dec-2006, 17:32
I bought this upgrade and its does not work. Be sure to try out a demo before you buy it to see if it might work for you.

Multi exposure does not align and leaves lots of artifacts in the scan.

The auto frame feature does not work. It drew three frames on one 4x5 frame.

I've written them about these problems (asked for a refund) and will post back what turns out. I'm sorry that I didn't read Kirk's post before proceeding. Live and learn.

Henry Ambrose
19-Dec-2006, 13:40
Perhaps I am too cynical these days.........

I got a fast response from Boris at Silverfast. Shortly thereafter he sent me a link to download a "fixed" version. I installed it and Multi-exposure scanning works now. I see no misalignment or artifacts. The scan looks good. In theory this feature should really extend the capability of flat bed scanners. After a bumpy start it looks good.

The new color features seem to work well although the Negafix profile for 160S doesn't seem to be as good with my 160S film as when using the old one for NPS. Overall the color is better than I've seen in the past. ACCO and CCR (two color correction features for color neg, CCR is new in 6.5) seem to be an improvement.

More trials to come with a tough to scan B&W neg.

Bill McMannis
19-Dec-2006, 14:06
Hi Henry,

What scanner are you using with Silverfast? I have spent the past few hours trying to get the demo version of Silverfast's multi-exposure to work on my 4870 to no avail?

Thanks!

Ken Lee
19-Dec-2006, 14:15
Is this feature built-in to VueScan ?

Can one do this one's self, by scanning multiple times, and then merging the layers in Photoshop ?

Ken Lee
19-Dec-2006, 14:28
Is this feature built-in to VueScan ?

Can one do this one's self, by scanning multiple times, and then merging the layers in Photoshop ?

Here's an anwer to my own question about VueScan, taken from http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc12.htm

Bold letters are mine.

Maximizing Image Quality

After you've decided on the resolution of your finished image (or alternatively the pixel dimensions of your finished image), how do you maximize the image quality? There's one thing you can do which involves taking longer to scan but getting more raw data for each pixel in the finished image.

The basic idea is scanning each pixel more than once and averaging these pixels. Each doubling of the number of pixels increases the effective number of useful bits of data by one. For instance, if you have a 10-bit scanner like the Nikon LS-30 and you read the CCD 4 times at each pixel position, you get effectively 12 bits of useful image data.

There are several ways of getting multiple image samples. The first of these is single-pass multi-scanning. Some scanners are capable of reading each pixel position multiple times before advancing the scan head to a new position. The film scanners that can do single-pass multi-scanning are the Minolta QuickScan 35, Scan Dual, Scan Dual III, Scan Multi, Scan Multi Pro, Scan Speed, Scan Elite, Scan Elite II and Nikon LS-2000/LS-4000/LS-8000. The second technique is multi-pass multi-scanning, which most scanners are capable of (however, some can't accurately reposition each scan pass, so this sometimes doesn't work well).

Another useful way of getting multiple image samples is to scan at a higher resolution and then average adjacent blocks of pixels. For instance, scanning at 2700 dpi and averaging every 2x2 block of pixels will result in a higher-quality 1350 dpi scan than just scanning at 1350 dpi. Scanning at 1350 dpi in this case will throw away every other pixel and every other scan line, while scanning at 2700 dpi and setting "Output|TIFF size reduction" to 2 will result in averaging 2x2 blocks of pixels and increasing the number of effective bits of resolution by 2 bits.

Note that multi-scanning is the only way to increase the quality at the highest resolution, and that using "Output|TIFF size reduction" is a better way of producing quality scans at lower resolutions.

Bill McMannis
19-Dec-2006, 15:23
SilverFast's tech support got my demo version issues resolved.

Things look promising.

Henry Ambrose
19-Dec-2006, 17:49
Bill,

I'm on a 4990 here.

Ken,

The idea here is that Silverfast will do it for you in software and it works on scanners that don't offer single pass multiple scanning. So in Silverfast Multi-Exposure mode the scanner does multiple scans at different exposures and the scans are put together in register in a 16 bit file via software. This is not Multi-Sampling (which they already offered) which I never found any real use for and I understand did not always register perfectly.

I don't know for sure if this will work as well as they claim (having done only one scan today) but it seems like a good idea. From their site Silverfast claims a huge increase in effective d-max of the scanner. I'd think that for anyone who wants or needs more range from their scanner this might be quite a feature.

I scanned a 4x5 at 1200 ppi at 2X Multi-exposure. That took about 11-12 minutes start to finish. The file looked good. But it was not a tough test - that comes tomorrow.

You can read about it here:

http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html

Bill McMannis
26-Dec-2006, 15:26
I finally got it working on my 4870. Silverfast support was very responsive. The results were surprisingly good. I had an image where the main subject was properly exposed, but the surrounding background was lost in shadow. I tried numerous scans of the transparency with Silverfast 6.4, but the results were unsatisfactory. I was preparing to to make the reshoot (four hours roundtrip driving, plus the actual time to shoot) but gave the new version of Silverfast a try.

The results were so good, the reshoot was unnecessary. I was able to pull "lost" details from the shadow area. Dare I say, it was almost like getting a new scanner.

This was only one image, but the cost of the upgrade paid for itself just in drive time. I plan on working the next few days rescanning some previously printed trannies to get a better idea of what to expect.

Michael Heald
26-Dec-2006, 16:38
Hello! How much of an improvement is multi-exposure over multi-sampling? Acordiing to Silverfast's data, the improvement in DMax for Epson 4990 was something like 3.2 for 2x multi-exposure compared to 3.1 for 4x multisampling. Given these numbers, I wasn't sure of the benefit, unless there is less chance of mechanical misalignment with multi-exposure vs multi-sampling. Best regards.

Mike

Bill McMannis
28-Dec-2006, 20:46
I hit annoying snag with my SilverFast upgrade. I emailed SilverFast's tech support about eight hours ago, but no reply yet. Here is what I have:

I upgraded from SilverFast AI 6.4 to SilverFast AI Studio 6.5. I successfully used the demo to insure compatability with my equipment, specifically an Epson 4870 scanner running under WinXP. Using the demo, I scanned 4x5 transparencies in 48bit using multi exposure. I was then able to process the scans as I always have using Photoshop CS2. After I upgraded to the licensed version, I began to have problems. As I assume most users do, I embed the ICC profile in the tiff to insure that my colors are as accurate as possible. Now when I use one of the standard filters on an image in PS, I get the error message such as “Could Not Complete the Reduce Noise Command Because the ICC Profile is Invalid.”

I created the ICC profile in Monaco’s EZColor v 2.6 and these are the profiles that worked successfully in SilverFast AI 6.4 and the demo of SilverFast 6.5. Just to make certain the profile was not corrupted, I created a new profile in EZColor, but the results are the same.

I can create a scan that does not create the error in PS by unclicking the option to embed the profile. The problem is without the profile, the image’s colors are washed out and the image is of no use.

Your suggestions are appreciated.

Thanks!

Greg Lockrey
2-Jan-2007, 07:46
I'll be asking a few of novice questions here about the Silverfast 6.5 AI Studio upgrade for my Epson 750V. Since I am new to Silverfast. I have been pretty satisfied with the Epson driver so far. Thanks to this thread I became educated with the multi sampling feature of Silverfast. And I do find it useful.

1. The button for Multi Sampling has "pages" diagrammed and Multi Exposure has a "light bulb", correct? I definitly didn't like the look with the "light bulb" mode. But it was just the first try.

2. When I downloaded the upgrade for my 750V, the Silverfast icon for my Epson 10000xl 'disappeared'. Where can I find the 10000xl version and place it back on the desktop with the 750V version?

3. If I use the Digital ICE with the Multi scan, would using it at the "faster speed" finish the scan as good as single scan on "best" when scanned four times or would using it on "best" be overkill? There is a big difference in the time to make the scan, but with the image I had to work with (35mm 30 year old Ektachrome with a lot of mould) I didn't see any difference on an 8x12". Both were pretty much mould free and sharp.

Thanks in advance,

Greg Lockrey
2-Jan-2007, 15:52
A follow up from my previous post:

1. The button for Multi Sampling has "pages" diagrammed and Multi Exposure has a "light bulb", correct? I definitly didn't like the look with the "light bulb" mode. But it was just the first try.

This must be the misalignment that Kirk had mentioned. Further attempts the machine seems to have settled down. There is definitetly an improvement over Multible Sampling in regard to shadow detail improvement.

2. When I downloaded the upgrade for my 750V, the Silverfast icon for my Epson 10000xl 'disappeared'. Where can I find the 10000xl version and place it back on the desktop with the 750V version?

All is well here also...just had to reinstall the vesion for the 10000xl from the disk.

3. If I use the Digital ICE with the Multi scan, would using it at the "quick mode" finish the scan as good as single scan on "quality" when scanned four times or would using it on "quality" be overkill? There is a big difference in the time to make the scan, but with the image I had to work with (35mm 30 year old Ektachrome with a lot of mould) I didn't see any difference on an 8x12". Both were pretty much mould free and sharp.


Digital ICE in "quick" mode seems to work just fine when using the 4 pass scan.

Greg Lockrey
6-Jan-2007, 19:42
There is a new versiion of the SilverFast 6.5.0r3d. This made an improvement in the highlight thresholds of my 4 pass exposure scan working with transparencies on my Epson 750V. It ain't perfect, but now usable.

harrykauf
13-Sep-2007, 14:38
I find the multi exposure feature pretty amazing. Here is a comparison I did
with the demo version:

slightly underexposed fuji provia 400 scanned at 1600dpi on an Epson v750.
top is the multi exposure scan and on the bottom the one pass scan.

http://www.sooshee.com/tmp/eyes01.jpg

Kirk Gittings
13-Sep-2007, 15:27
Pretty sweet huh!

Keith S. Walklet
13-Sep-2007, 15:57
So, with the Silverfast software, is the multiple exposure mode sampling the same line of data 4x at different exposures before moving to the next scan line or is it running the multiple exposure during 4 different passes?

With the latter approach, like Kirk, I find there is too much slop in my 4870 stepper motor to get the same size scan on any two passes, and the data doesn't match up. If the Silverfast scans at multiple exposures on the same pass, that IS exciting, though the sample you posted does show marked improvement.

harrykauf
13-Sep-2007, 16:09
Keith: The progress bar shows 2 passes in the multiexposure mode. I find the result
much better than what I got with the regular multipass mode. There I would get
pretty blurry results too.

Oh yeah and test it with the demo version to see if it works with your model. I tried it
with a Plustek 35mm scanner and the multi exposure scan looked completeley different
from the single pass, with badly clipped shadows and almost no midtones.

Keith S. Walklet
13-Sep-2007, 16:46
I'm downloading it as I type!

Clueless Winddancing
13-Sep-2007, 21:42
What affect might there be from local vibrating equipment, fans, computers, printers, outside automobile traffic, or even just walking around the scanner?

Don Miller
25-Sep-2007, 20:00
Any more success or failure stories with this technique? The example above is impressive.

Ben R
29-Sep-2007, 14:34
Is it just me or is the new feature noticeably softer than a single pass? I'm new to scanning using a 4990 but when comparing regular to multiexposure the regular has better edge definition and to be honest I'm not seeing a particularly noticeable difference in grain or shadow detail either in 16 bit scans.

Kirk Gittings
29-Sep-2007, 14:48
This is the bane of consumer level scanners. The step motors are not precision enough to provide two scans of equal size or even consistent speed throughout the scan. This is not so noticeable when you do a single pass, but when you try and overlap two supposedly identical scans, the problem jumps out. Sometimes you get fuzzy areas within the scan for the same reason.

Wet mounting can help eliminate other issues. Try doing a "preheat" dummy scan to warm it up fully. I sometimes set up three identical scans back to back as a batch, go to bed, and pick the best one in the morning.

Ben R
29-Sep-2007, 15:20
I tried a full 16 bit scan first, didn't seem to help, you've also solved something that was confusing me, i.e. the parts of the image seemingly OOF that can't have been.

I'm still trying to get a handle on scanning, I'm assuming that the seeming lack of contrast and sharpness compared to my Canon L lenses even after appropriate sharpening is a fault in the scanner, no prime should look that medicore (90mm Caltar IIN f6.8). This is after finding the best plane of focus with the scanner. I have no doubt that there is a huge amount of information still in the neg that the scanner just cannot resolve sharply. The results look kind of like photographing a photograph with a cheap zoom.

Don Miller
29-Sep-2007, 18:16
The results look kind of like photographing a photograph with a cheap zoom.


The 100% view won't look as good as dslr digital at the same magnification. But the much bigger file should make a very detailed print. This should be true for any of the consumer scanners mentioned in this forum. Something seems wrong with your scans.

Back to the main topic. Which flatbeds supported by siverfast have good enough registration to do consistent multiscans?

Kirk Gittings
29-Sep-2007, 19:52
Don, I have owned them all it seems, Epson 3200, 4800, 4900, 750 (currently), Canon's, Microtek's, 1800f (except the i800), none of them do on a consistent basis that I have found. The best was the Microtek 1800f, but it was not good enough that I didn't sell it. Hence the need to do tricks like warm up scans. Some are pretty good brand new but loosen up quickly. It is simply not economically feasible apparently to put a decent step motor in a sub $1000 scanner.

This issue is part of the reason that we talk about enlargement size limitations from these scanners. Even without multi pass scanning it contributes to a loss of real world resolution. I was never happy with a 16x20 from a 4x5 on any of these scanners compared to even an Imacon (which I have access too), which is why I have gone back to getting high end scans on all of my exhibit intended work. I put way too much time tweaking a file, to get the print I want, to waste that time on anything but the best scan. I use the 750 for magazine and prints smaller than 16x20 work all the time.