Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: Polaroid 4000 dpi
I too have noticed funny things with the focusing with my SS4000
(running Vuescan, don't know about PCI - haven't used it in a while).
I've scanned a slide, found too much dust, re-scanned it and found that
the focusing had changed slightly - the dust was in sharp focus, but the
image was slightly less sharp. Don't know if this is a software issure
or something to do with the slide holder. I've noticed that when you
insert a slide into the holder, it is usually not flat - that is the
holder doesn't do a good job of keeping the slide all in one plane
relative to the distance from the CCD. I now usually tweek the slide
while it's in the holder to make sure it will be consistently the same
distance from the CCD (or at least best I can relative to the slide
holder). This is one example of wanting a better slide (and negative)
holder from Polaroid.
Will try the dust-thing that Ed talks about sometime soon - as soon as I
can find a totally over exposed slide (no real photographer has any of
> In a message dated 4/23/2001 11:25:15 AM EST, email@example.com writes:
> > I haven't been following the discussion of the Nikon 4000 other than to
> > catch snippets about edge-to-edge focusing problems/allegations.
> It still isn't clear if the edge-to-edge focusing issue is caused by
> the lens of the camera taking the test images or if it's caused by
> a limited depth of field of the LS-4000.
> An easy way to test this would be to scan a dusty negative at
> 4000 dpi and then seeing if the dust spots are equally focused
> at the edges as in the center. Doing this test with both negatives
> and slides would be interesting (slides seem to have more of a
> bow sometimes than negatives).
> > But I have no actual
> > disappointments with the SS4000 at all.
> It's a very nice scanner. The whole focus process is a bit slow,
> but the image quality is excellent.
> Ed Hamrick