|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
David (Soderman), Sorry if this reply is a little slow but I am a digest subscriber.............. You said Tan wrote: > I have just received my Minolta SMP and have experienced the same thing > with negatives. I have scanned Fuji Reala to very unsatisfactory results. > Reala is as fine grained a negative film as it gets. XP2 is equally bad. Thanks, Tan! So it's *not* just my unit. Dave, it really isn't just your unit. I have seen other scans done on negs with the DSMP which were pretty crap! > I tried the defocus suggestion and it doesn't do any good - I get a > slightly blurred version of a grainy scan! Did you then try applying USM? (Are you out there, Art & Kennedy?) Yes, i sure did. Doesn't help! > > The only way to get less grain is really a heavy dose of GEM - 50% or more. > But using GEM destroys data somewhat. How long did it take you to apply GEM? I have yet to see the "progress bar" even move...even after waiting 45 minutes! GEM is a very CPU intensive process from what I can gather. I run a reasonably fast PC - Athlon 1.2Ghz, 1 gig RAM, striped IDE RAID array, running Win2000, etc. It is indeed slow but I haven't experienced anything like 45 mins. On a 90+ megabyte 35mm neg scan, it takes about 5 mins on my machine at GEM=50, which is already pretty darn annoying if you ask me. > > Scans of Provia F on the other hand is superb. The results are pretty awesome. Glad to hear that. I'm happy for you. Well, I am semi-happy because like yourself, I am a frequent negative shooter myself so I need the bloody thing to scan negs good! ;-) I tried Vuescan (I had bought this for my previous LS-4000) for slide scanning and it seemed to worked even better. The tonal range is better than what the Minolta scanner driver could do, but as you can see in another post I made later, Vuescan has problems with the DSMP scanner - it crashes the scanner whenever it's asked to scan negs. I prefer Ed Hamrick's scratch removal algorithm - I can set the strength of cleaning. > > So, my interim conclusion is that the Minolta is an excellent slide > scanner, but has a lot to be desired for negative scanning. Other web > reviews seem to back this. Please steer me to those web reviews that speak of neg scanning. Tan, you've been more of a help to this dude than you'll ever know. ;-) You've saved me lots of potentially wasted time in my continued hijinx of neg scanning web reports. Okay: 1. http://web.tiscali.it/saphoto/scanimages2.html (his neg was an old Kodak VR200); I swear that this fella or Peter Wolff had a pic of a negative scan that looked exactly like the ultra grainy mush that I have been seeing! He or Wolff seems to have updated the pages and removed the pic) 2. http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/DSMP/DSMMUS5.HTM (these are low res scans but I can see the same effect on my own negatives) 3. http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN/DSMP/DSMMUS4.HTM For me, my living depends upon negatives (until I switch to a digital pro cam). Slides just won't fit into my workflow. But now, I'll just scan several transparencies to confirm your report...then it's off to Ebay I go. (With a clear conscience, thanks to you). Joyfully, -david soderman- <>< :-) Myself I am waiting for Ed Hamrick to update his Vuescan driver to make up my mind. The pro retailer I bought my unit from has agreed to take it back if I continue to be unhappy. - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.