Vuescan and Minolta Scan Dual IV problems: who can help a ..

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

Hello,

I experience some problems with Vuescan (versions 7.6 as well as
8.0b3 and 8.0) scanning color negatives with my new Minolta Scan Dual
IV.

1- there appear faint colored bands on all scans in the direction of
the film holder movement, difficult to see, but present all the same.
At first I overlooked them, but as the edges are perfectly straight,
but they became easier to spot after I did some more scans. No
banding appears when I use the Minolta software.

2- when I set the "Number of samples" to 2 or higher, the results
show very brightly colored bands, all the same width, with sharp
edges. The predominant colors are cyan, magenta, yellow and blue. The
image is present, but only faintly. This phenomenon disappears at
scan resolutions of less than 1600, but not at 1600 and up.

3- the auto focus doesn't seem to work, I have to use manual focus to
get sharp scans. For example auto focus finds a setting of 0.925,
while testing manually I come up with 0.2. When focussing the scanner
is busy a much longer time in v 8.0 than in 7.6. But none of the 2
versions succeeded in focussing the image correctly.

I am very new at this work, so probably I am doing things wrong, but
whatever I try as suggested in the manual or as mentioned here in the
group: things stay as I describe here.

Scanning BW negatives is fine: I have the feeling Vuescan is doing a
better job here than Minolta.

Is anyone here having the same experiences with the same scanner as I
have? As I am a newbie I want to make sure it is not me before I
submit this to Ed. Thank you in advance for any help.

--
Greetings,
A.
7 answers Last reply
More about vuescan minolta scan dual problems
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    On Sat, 15 May 2004 06:58:20 -0500, Alex Stols <> wrote:

    >Hello,
    >
    >I experience some problems with Vuescan (versions 7.6 as well as
    >8.0b3 and 8.0) scanning color negatives with my new Minolta Scan Dual
    >IV.
    >
    >1- there appear faint colored bands on all scans in the direction of
    >the film holder movement, difficult to see, but present all the same.
    >At first I overlooked them, but as the edges are perfectly straight,
    >but they became easier to spot after I did some more scans. No
    >banding appears when I use the Minolta software.
    >
    >2- when I set the "Number of samples" to 2 or higher, the results
    >show very brightly colored bands, all the same width, with sharp
    >edges. The predominant colors are cyan, magenta, yellow and blue. The
    >image is present, but only faintly. This phenomenon disappears at
    >scan resolutions of less than 1600, but not at 1600 and up.
    >
    >3- the auto focus doesn't seem to work, I have to use manual focus to
    >get sharp scans. For example auto focus finds a setting of 0.925,
    >while testing manually I come up with 0.2. When focussing the scanner
    >is busy a much longer time in v 8.0 than in 7.6. But none of the 2
    >versions succeeded in focussing the image correctly.
    >
    >I am very new at this work, so probably I am doing things wrong, but
    >whatever I try as suggested in the manual or as mentioned here in the
    >group: things stay as I describe here.
    >
    >Scanning BW negatives is fine: I have the feeling Vuescan is doing a
    >better job here than Minolta.
    >
    >Is anyone here having the same experiences with the same scanner as I
    >have? As I am a newbie I want to make sure it is not me before I
    >submit this to Ed. Thank you in advance for any help.


    Yes, this is happening to me also, vuescan 8.0.11. Lots of color
    banding, especially green and magentas, but this problem also exhibits
    in b/w mode if I set the scan input type to b/w.
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    Red Mage <cpc0000@comcast.net> wrote:
    >On Sat, 15 May 2004 06:58:20 -0500, Alex Stols <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >Yes, this is happening to me also, vuescan 8.0.11. Lots of color
    >banding, especially green and magentas, but this problem also
    >exhibits
    >in b/w mode if I set the scan input type to b/w.
    >

    Hello RM,

    Glad someone responded at last!
    I have been quite busy with B&W negatives and I must say that I love
    Vuescan for the way it handles the tasks.
    In the mean time all my B&W negatives have been done once - maybe
    later on I decide to do them again perhaps when I am wiser in the
    trade...

    Color I have started to do now: I use the Minolta sw and I get good
    results. Only thing is - it is slow and I have to treat all negatives
    separately for maximum color and contrast results.

    All the time there has been no improvement as to the two main
    problems the SD4 shows with Vuescan. No autofocus in any mode. No
    multisampling possible and also slight color banding using just the 1
    sample scan. I have mailed Ed H. repeatedly sending a problem report,
    and I got the impression that he is still working on it. Ed has
    stated earlier that the multisampling is now OK - it isn't.
    Regarding autofocussing: no response from Ed on that subject as yet.

    My question to you is:
    Are you having autofocus problems too? If not, what workflow do you
    use?

    Thanks in advance for any response on these matters!

    --
    Regards, Alex
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    "Alex Stols" <xel@invalid.org> wrote:
    > I have mailed Ed H. repeatedly sending a problem report,
    > and I got the impression that he is still working on it. Ed has
    > stated earlier that the multisampling is now OK - it isn't.
    > Regarding autofocussing: no response from Ed on that subject as yet.

    It's getting closer to the top of my list. I need to first
    finish integrating the new Epson 2480/2580 (I bought one today),
    fix a problem with the LiDE 20/30 on Mac OS X, and finish integrating
    the Plustek 7200 dpi film scanner (Plustek loaned me one).

    Regards,
    Ed Hamrick
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    "Ed Hamrick" <usenet@hamrick.com> wrote:
    >"Alex Stols" <xel@invalid.org> wrote:
    >> I have mailed Ed H. repeatedly sending a problem report,
    >> and I got the impression that he is still working on it. Ed has
    >> stated earlier that the multisampling is now OK - it isn't.
    >> Regarding autofocussing: no response from Ed on that subject as
    >>yet.
    >
    >It's getting closer to the top of my list. I need to first
    >finish integrating the new Epson 2480/2580 (I bought one today),
    >fix a problem with the LiDE 20/30 on Mac OS X, and finish integrating
    >the Plustek 7200 dpi film scanner (Plustek loaned me one).
    >
    >Regards,
    >Ed Hamrick
    >
    >
    Glad to hear this! I will praise the day that I can do color
    negatives the same fast and accurate way I can do B&W.

    --
    Regards, Alex
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:37:57 -0700, "Ed Hamrick" <usenet@hamrick.com>
    wrote:

    >"Alex Stols" <xel@invalid.org> wrote:
    >> I have mailed Ed H. repeatedly sending a problem report,
    >> and I got the impression that he is still working on it. Ed has
    >> stated earlier that the multisampling is now OK - it isn't.
    >> Regarding autofocussing: no response from Ed on that subject as yet.
    >
    >It's getting closer to the top of my list. I need to first
    >finish integrating the new Epson 2480/2580 (I bought one today),
    >fix a problem with the LiDE 20/30 on Mac OS X, and finish integrating
    >the Plustek 7200 dpi film scanner (Plustek loaned me one).
    >
    >Regards,
    >Ed Hamrick
    >

    Glad to hear it too -- Vuescan is just about useless for me as it is
    now... Sometimes the banding is worse than other times, which tells
    me its either a calibration problem, or something coming across
    uncompensated for.

    Something weird too: I tried the silverfast demo, which works OK for
    this scanner (but I wont purchase, since I don't like the software
    overall), but one thing is shows is 6400 dpi for this scanner! I've
    tried it, and I get the resolution I expect, but is it REALLY doing
    this, or some kind of software interpolation? Hmmmm.... Guess I
    don't really need 100MB files, anyway!

    Since I'm archiving right now, my workflow is simple: Optical scan at
    highest resolution with minimal adjustments (focus, white balance,
    some cropping), then bring into photoshop for first pass color
    correcting and some grain reduction. (I use Applied Science Fiction's
    grain reducer, which is nice, and Kodak's ROC software, which is
    absolutely essential!)

    Once it's in photoshop and archived, I can take a copy and work on it
    for output.

    It looks like vuescan will give me a bit cleaner scans, once the
    banding problems are gone...
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    Red Mage <cpc0000@comcast.net> wrote:
    >On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 03:37:57 -0700, "Ed Hamrick" <usenet@hamrick.com>
    <snip>
    >
    >>It's getting closer to the top of my list. I need to first
    >>finish integrating the new Epson 2480/2580 (I bought one today),
    >>fix a problem with the LiDE 20/30 on Mac OS X, and finish
    >>integrating
    >>the Plustek 7200 dpi film scanner (Plustek loaned me one).
    >>
    >>Regards,
    >>Ed Hamrick
    >>
    >
    >Glad to hear it too -- Vuescan is just about useless for me as it is
    >now... Sometimes the banding is worse than other times, which tells
    >me its either a calibration problem, or something coming across
    >uncompensated for.
    >
    >Something weird too: I tried the silverfast demo, which works OK for
    >this scanner (but I wont purchase, since I don't like the software
    >overall), but one thing is shows is 6400 dpi for this scanner! I've
    >tried it, and I get the resolution I expect, but is it REALLY doing
    >this, or some kind of software interpolation? Hmmmm.... Guess I
    >don't really need 100MB files, anyway!
    >
    >Since I'm archiving right now, my workflow is simple: Optical scan at
    >highest resolution with minimal adjustments (focus, white balance,
    >some cropping), then bring into photoshop for first pass color
    >correcting and some grain reduction. (I use Applied Science Fiction's
    >grain reducer, which is nice, and Kodak's ROC software, which is
    >absolutely essential!)
    >
    >Once it's in photoshop and archived, I can take a copy and work on it
    >for output.
    >
    >It looks like vuescan will give me a bit cleaner scans, once the
    >banding problems are gone...
    >

    I don't know about Silverfast: the resolution is supposedly not above
    3200, and in the scanner bake-off by Jim Hutchinson it appeared that
    the practical resolution was nearer 20 line pairs per mm. I don't
    know how to convert to resolution, but it means that under average
    circumstances the number of black lines you can see separated is
    about that figure - or about 550 per inch. I reckon that the
    'resolution' then is about 1100 dpi or somewhat higher. Still a lot
    lower than 3200, and certainly not 6400! You do get 3200 dpi anyway
    at the highest setting, sometimes scratches as small as 2 pixels can
    be seen clearly.

    I'm archiving also, my workflow for B&W is, using Vuescan, the
    'advanced' as suggested by Ed H., saving the RAW files and converting
    to TIF/JPG to have a quick look. I wish I had Digital ICE :))
    I've tentatively started to use Minolta sw to scan color, but really
    i'm waiting for Ed to get Vuescan right for the SD4

    --
    Regards, Alex
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.scanners,alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

    Ed, it's good to know that your little program is getting so much
    attention. I started reading about it from Steve's D when I was
    interested in the Epson scanners in the 2450/3200 class and now I am
    about to decide on a 2580-class scanner.

    Since you have recent experience with the 2580, can you indicate how
    well the 2580 over USB2 compares to the 3200 device over the firewire
    connection, using 2400 lpi optical as a reference? I'm very interested
    in throughput issues, both with regard to scanning speeds, and in
    comparing Firewire 400 vs. USB2 effective transfer rates. Essentially,
    does the 11 msec/line of the 2580 overcome the 14.3 msec/line of the
    3200 in a real multi-photo production scanning job?

    And in general, does the type and speed of the host computer have a
    great bearing on the throughput of scanning and color-correcting old
    photos? For example, comparing a 466Mhz iBook with Firewire with a
    Pentium II-450 (either USB2 or Firewire 400). Both have 384MB memory
    and large disks.

    Thanks for your comments and advice.
    --Will

    "Ed Hamrick" <usenet@hamrick.com> wrote in message news:<cfcsu0$6me$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>...
    > "Alex Stols" <xel@invalid.org> wrote:
    > > I have mailed Ed H. repeatedly sending a problem report,
    > > and I got the impression that he is still working on it. Ed has
    > > stated earlier that the multisampling is now OK - it isn't.
    > > Regarding autofocussing: no response from Ed on that subject as yet.
    >
    > It's getting closer to the top of my list. I need to first
    > finish integrating the new Epson 2480/2580 (I bought one today),
    > fix a problem with the LiDE 20/30 on Mac OS X, and finish integrating
    > the Plustek 7200 dpi film scanner (Plustek loaned me one).
    >
    > Regards,
    > Ed Hamrick
Ask a new question

Read More

Scanners Peripherals