Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon Coolscan 8000 advice  (Read 2860 times)
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6900


WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 08, 2014, 11:48:54 AM »
ReplyReply

I have the original Minolta 5400, not the II; it is an excellent scanner but very slow. The 5400 II has improved speed over the original.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Fine_Art
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1087


« Reply #21 on: February 08, 2014, 12:11:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the original Minolta 5400, not the II; it is an excellent scanner but very slow. The 5400 II has improved speed over the original.

Ok, are you saying the 5400 does not come close to it's stated resolution?
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6900


WWW
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2014, 12:20:09 PM »
ReplyReply

It is quite some years ago that I tested it and don't have ready access to the data, but I do recall it was less than 5400 using the LSI USAF 1951 resolution target. I should haul out that scanner and retest it (when time permits) now that SilverFast 8 supports it. Regardless of the exact number, this scanner produces very fine detailed scans - every bit as good as my Nikon SC5000ED, but much slower.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
BartvanderWolf
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3581


« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2014, 01:10:25 PM »
ReplyReply

It is quite some years ago that I tested it and don't have ready access to the data, but I do recall it was less than 5400 using the LSI USAF 1951 resolution target. I should haul out that scanner and retest it (when time permits) now that SilverFast 8 supports it. Regardless of the exact number, this scanner produces very fine detailed scans - every bit as good as my Nikon SC5000ED, but much slower.

Hi Mark,

The USAF 1951 target is not very well suited for resolution testing of discrete sampling systems, a slanted edge target is, or a film shot of a Star target, depending whether one wants to test  only the scanner MTF, or the (film+scanner) system MTF and resolution.

When I measured the options at the time,  I got the following resolutions; LS2000: 45.4 cy/mm, LS4000: 62.1 cy/mm, SE5400: 76.1 cy/mm. The SE5400 beat them all at resolution.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Fine_Art
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1087


« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2014, 01:14:34 PM »
ReplyReply

It is quite some years ago that I tested it and don't have ready access to the data, but I do recall it was less than 5400 using the LSI USAF 1951 resolution target. I should haul out that scanner and retest it (when time permits) now that SilverFast 8 supports it. Regardless of the exact number, this scanner produces very fine detailed scans - every bit as good as my Nikon SC5000ED, but much slower.

Years back on Dyxum a member posted an image he scanned with Velvia. I ripped the grain out with Noise Ninja 2. While the film (as usual) did not have the sharp edges of digital pixels, with sharpening it looked quite good at 100%. You have to be sure the limitation is the scanner res not the grain.

If you do test it again maybe try provia in addition to the standard velvia.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6900


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 08, 2014, 01:17:55 PM »
ReplyReply

The USAF 1951 transparency is the test target, whatever it is printed on - it is pure black on transparent; grain is a non-issue.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6900


WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 08, 2014, 01:20:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Mark,

The USAF 1951 target is not very well suited for resolution testing of discrete sampling systems, a slanted edge target is,
Cheers,
Bart

I've raised that issue with LSI in the past and they disagree - strongly. I have not tested both to see myself. If you have, please post comparative outcomes indicating which is the more accurate.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Dave Gurtcheff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 466


« Reply #27 on: February 08, 2014, 02:49:17 PM »
ReplyReply

To all:
 Now I am sure it is a Firewire issue. I discovered that my wife's old iMac running OSX has a firewire port. I contacted Ed Hamrick to see which old version of Vuescan might run on the old iMac. I downloaded it, attached the Coolscan, and Vuescan found it, and it scans successfully!! Again Vuescan to the rescue! I also was contacted from a gentleman on one of these forums that said that the Coolscan 8000 and 9000 were very fussy with which firewire cards they liked...so much so that Nikon included a firewire card with their scanners. He had a brand new one that came with his then new 9000. He offered it to me for postage plus a very nominal fee. I purchased it and will install in my PC. I also ordered a PCMCIA-Firewire adapter card to put in my ancient Windows XP notebook PC, so as a last resort I may be able to scan from it. Thanks all...I am again a "Happy Camper"........the 8000 is a beautiful machine worthy of scanning my Dad's negatives.
 Best to all....
 Dave in NJ
Logged
Pete_G
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 233


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2014, 09:34:52 AM »
ReplyReply

I would say it's due to the Win 7 Firewire drivers too. I solved FW problems with my Win 7 64 computer sometime ago. Google "Windows 7 Firewire problems" and follow some of the better links. You have to install an older FW driver (legacy) rather than the new one which is broken. This isn't difficult.
Logged

___________________
http://www.petergoddard.org
Dave Gurtcheff
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 466


« Reply #29 on: February 21, 2014, 09:56:14 AM »
ReplyReply

The story has a happy ending. Today, I finally installed a PCI Express Firewire card. When I booted up my PC, Win 7 searched the internet, and installed a driver. When I opened Vuescan, it found the Nikon Coolscan 8000, and it works beautifully. The previous owner included the hard to find (and expensive) glass medium format film carrier, along with three glassless carriers. This scanner is a beauty.
Thanks all for your help.
Dave in NJ
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7333


WWW
« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2014, 02:37:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Congratulations and please enjoy!

Best regards
Erik


The story has a happy ending. Today, I finally installed a PCI Express Firewire card. When I booted up my PC, Win 7 searched the internet, and installed a driver. When I opened Vuescan, it found the Nikon Coolscan 8000, and it works beautifully. The previous owner included the hard to find (and expensive) glass medium format film carrier, along with three glassless carriers. This scanner is a beauty.
Thanks all for your help.
Dave in NJ
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad