You should never use a resolution setting higher than 2400 (a bit above the real optical resolution of the machine and you might want to see if a bit lower work, it will keep your files a manageable size. You shouldn't get Newton's Rings since the scanning path is above the film.
I am scanning 5x7 film and was getting Newton Rings until I started wet mounting. I did not try the spray though. It is quick and easy. Kami mounting fluid sprayed on the glass, neg emulsion up, more mounting fluid then a piece of mylar on top of the neg. I don't tape it down but 5x7 film is pretty flat so I cannot say if other formats would need taping. The Kami fluid just evaporates and I am able to use the mylar a few times. Be sure to press out any air bubbles.
I do see enough of an improvement in the scan to make it worth doing along with the elimination of newton rings.
I just got out of an OSHA training session and started wondering about the flash point of Kamis fluid. I wonder if another wet mount fluid might be better for using in the M1 since it does get hot inside of the scanner!
Steven, you are much better off using Prazio liquids www.prazio.com.
Re: Microtek M1 user experiences
I just purchased the Artixscan M1 Pro via Calumet online.
For all of the reviews placed in plain sight thus far, it appears to be a mixed bag of results... except for the initial flood of Silverfast related issues that may have been fixed to a great degree.
I am anxious to results from Ted Harris...
I will take a look at Prazio. Thanks for the suggestion.
Steve,
looking forward to your result.
Question, as Ted mentioned above, tape the 57 neg on the glass tray won't cause the NR, and you still get it?
my experience of the NR issue based on my 8000ed and 869G holder is that, it is the emulsion side of the neg and the clear glass cause the problem, and normally the matte glass(Anti NR glass) on top of the neg will fix the problem.
As there is nothing between the head and the emulsion side of the neg in the M1 per Ted's way. I don't know where the NR come from?
Correct me should i am wrong.
Cheers
Andrew
I am very intrigued by the lack of reviews - and comparison shots - of the M1/F1 scanner. This scanner was a long time in the waiting. There was a lot of interest in its performance. A scanner at a very affordable price, offering glassless scanning, auto focus, and performance above other pro-sumer scanners, sparked a lot of interest.
Yet, after months on the market, still no serious technical reviews, from anybody. Nobody was expecting miraculous results to match those of a drum scanner or high end flatbeds.
No reviewer still has put a figure on its resolution, but about 2200lpi is what anyone is prepared to guess, but no lab-tested figure is produced to date - by any tester. The same with Dmax, guess work, but no lab tested result for Dmax. Where are these figures from the all reviewers that Microtek sent test units too. If I was Microtek I would be asking for better from the reviewers who were sent test units.
The White Spider is very subjective. Ted Harris did a one page spread in View Camera which said precisely nothing - not worth publishing. It said the unit was marginally better than other prosumer scanners - a line he constantly repeated ad-nauseam before this scanner was ever released.
As I have moved and have stored this issue away, I thought he said there was going to be an in depth review in the next issue. This did not eventuate - but excuse me if am wrong, as I am going by my memory (maybe too much red wine).
Anyway when and where are we going to see his in depth technical review with his measured results for resolution and Dmax as he has produced for other scanner reviews – surely it doesn’t take this long?
Where is the review from Photo-i to date - the same again? His excuse is that Microtek did not send him a test unit. You know what, it is very easy to go down to the local computer shop and just buy an M1/F1 off the shelf and do a truly independent review - that easy!
On many forums members have asked for comparison shots of the M1/F1 with higher-end scanners, i.e., the Hassy forum, this forum, and others. These comparison shots never seem to eventuate. That is what I want to see - how the scans compare with a drum or Cezanne. But after months on the market – precious little good information about this scanner has appeared to date.
Doesn’t any reviewer want to commit themselves to a serious technical review? Not just subjective comments, which is all I have seen to date.
Correction please. The review I did included a resolution test using an AIG test target as always and the test showed a resolution of slightly under 2400. Early on I also posted some images here. Testing the DMax is still very much on my list but I have virtually incapacitated with back problems for nearly a month. I never publish pictures of scans on the web as they can be very misleading. I'll also point out that most scanner reviewers never do any independent testing of resolution or Dmax.
A serious technical review of a consumer scanner v. a highend scanner would have to either assume a huge amount of knowledge on the part of the reader or run to many any pages and take months to complete. For example, one of the key differences between any consumer flatbed and the Cezanne or any other high end flatbed is the consistancy of the stepping motors and the number of steps they take from start to finish. You're talking very sophisticated testing equipment that costs very big bucks. If you go bac to one of the ealier reviews in View Camera you will find a lengthy discussion of these difference.
Finally its the results that count. If you want to see the differences just scan a 4x5 on any of the better consumer scanners at 2400spi in 16 bit color then send the film to a good lab and have them scan to the same parameters then print both files to 16x20 or 20x24, you'll see the differences, especially at 20x24.
Correction please. The review I did included a resolution test using an AIG test target as always and the test showed a resolution of slightly under 2400. Early on I also posted some images here. Testing the DMax is still very much on my list but I have virtually incapacitated with back problems for nearly a month. I never publish pictures of scans on the web as they can be very misleading. I'll also point out that most scanner reviewers never do any independent testing of resolution or Dmax.
A serious technical review of a consumer scanner v. a highend scanner would have to either assume a huge amount of knowledge on the part of the reader or run to many any pages and take months to complete. For example, one of the key differences between any consumer flatbed and the Cezanne or any other high end flatbed is the consistancy of the stepping motors and the number of steps they take from start to finish. You're talking very sophisticated testing equipment that costs very big bucks. If you go bac to one of the ealier reviews in View Camera you will find a lengthy discussion of these difference.
Finally its the results that count. If you want to see the differences just scan a 4x5 on any of the better consumer scanners at 2400spi in 16 bit color then send the film to a good lab and have them scan to the same parameters then print both files to 16x20 or 20x24, you'll see the differences, especially at 20x24.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks