Screen Cezanne Users Unite

[Bob McCarthy]

l always scanned at a divisor of the chip to minimize math errors in interpretation. so i'd scan at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 8000 dpi. the sensor is a 8000 pixel ccd 3 line chip. Now the downside of 8000 dpi is file size and the optical resolution doesnt quite keep up as has been pointed out. but that eliminates some alising artifacts in huge blowups. I believe most downsizing and sharpening algorithims have improved greatly since ColorGenius was written.

that said I scanned 35mm at 4000 dpi.

the great thing about the cezanne class machine is the lens focuses and zooms optically to the exact area of the scan rather than full screen interpretation like the consumer class machines.

bob

[Peter De Smidt]

Peter - what do you mean by "right sample area?" I assume just a small enough area for the scanner to properly scan at that setting?

Yes. There are a couple of reasons to scan so high. First, and I only have experience with BW film, the grain will be the finest it can be. Second, it allows you to print at 720dpi on an Epson at any reasonable print size. Third, the image may be softer at full size on screen, but that's a huge size! When printed at a normal size the amount of detail and low noise enables making a higher quality print. But... don't take my word for it! Try making some prints.

[Bob McCarthy]

Peter brings up a good point. Do not pixel peep at 100 percent to see apparent sharpness. 25% is more appropriate to the final print.

bob

[Corran]

Of course not (though digital spoils me, since it can look sharp up to 100% sometimes).

It's interesting what you mention Peter about fine grain - that's something I've struggled with on 135 quite a bit. My Minolta Dimage IV had good resolution but the grain was always very coarse.

I might not be out of the woods yet here. I scanned a Tri-X negative (4x5) and an area in the photo with straight lines, the scan has the lines being wavy! I'm not convinced it's the scanner, but me doing something wrong and not having the film secure enough.

[Peter De Smidt]

Another option to consider is that you can make a holder with a glass plate that can be wet-mounted to. That's what I do.

[Corran]

I really don't want to wet-mount things. I just don't have the time or patience!

Currently scanning a whole roll of 135, and things are running smoothly. I'm almost positive the issue is something screwy I'm doing - that's the only thing that makes sense.

[coisasdavida]

Bob, and Peter - no need to worry, I've fixed the issue.

Would you mind letting me know how?

[Bob McCarthy]

I might not be out of the woods yet here. I scanned a Tri-X negative (4x5) and an area in the photo with straight lines, the scan has the lines being wavy! I'm not convinced it's the scanner, but me doing something wrong and not having the film secure enough.

Bryan, wavy lines can be network issues, usually not mechanical issues. As you can imagine sampling millions of points on the film need to be assembled correctly. timing is a stringent need for software speaking to the hardware in real time. The computer and it's connections to the scanner must be working seamlessly. Any network resends and timing glitches can cause a number of artifacts, including wavy lines, and linear misfires. So the health of the connects must be sound. I would plug and re-plug all interconnects to assure clean connections. A power line running over the cabling can cause corruptions. Just check all cabling for sound connection and no external interference. remember the terminator on the computer scsi connector is also part of the network.

Whether these are contributing is a guess, but good network connectivity is a must on a scanner running at the frequencies your running with. I used the scanner for sheet film (4x5 & 8x10) almost exclusively. I did scan some 6x7 medium format at 4000 dpi without issue.

And it could be software contributing. some of your settings could come into play.

A sturdy table is also a must to dampen any vibrations.

just a few ideas.

bob

[Bob McCarthy]

Another option to consider is that you can make a holder with a glass plate that can be wet-mounted to. That's what I do.

Bryan, consider

http://scanscience.com/index.html

or

http://aztek.com/consumables.html

as a source of ideas and supplies. Wet scanning can get detail out that no other method can. I use the Aztec system.

bob

[Corran]

Would you mind letting me know how?

I believe my issue was related to the film moving while scanning, jostling on the bed. I was only using one hold-down plate and after butting up another one on the other side it seemed to fix the issue.

That said, I still have had it happen a couple times after carefully securing the film. So Bob's suggestions above are good ones. I am going to re-route all the cables to make sure I don't have a high-power cable crossing the SCSI cables, and I am going to do some clean-up of the inside and outside of the connections. I might also try securing the table even more - as it is it is sturdy, but might could be made even better.

Thanks for the links Bob. At the very least I think I'm going to get some cleaning fluid from Aztek. The scanner resolves so much that I am seeing more dust and scratches than I've ever seen with my other scanners.