Slide scanners

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Grant Dixon, Jan 4, 2004.

  1. Grant Dixon

    Grant Dixon Guest

    I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    regarding your experience and opinions.

    --
    Grant

    Home Pages http://home.cogeco.ca/~grant.dixon/index.htm

    Challenge Pages http://home.cogeco.ca/~challenge/

    *********************************************************

    Creativity is so delicate a flower that praise tends to make it bloom, while
    discouragement often nips it in the bud. Any of us will put out more and
    better ideas if our efforts are appreciated.

    Alexander Osborn (1888 - 1966)

    *********************************************************
    Grant Dixon, Jan 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Grant Dixon

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    On 3-Jan-2004, "Grant Dixon" <> wrote:

    > I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    > the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    > Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    > regarding your experience and opinions.


    I don't know about the Nikon, but the 5400 is great. We've had several slide
    scanners over the years and this is by far the best.

    The scan time is longish on our Mac (90 sec or more) but the results are
    great. I was tempted by the new Nikon with the 20sec scan time but the 5400
    is cheaper and available now.

    --
    Tom Thackrey
    www.creative-light.com
    tom (at) creative (dash) light (dot) com
    do NOT send email to (it's reserved for spammers)
    Tom Thackrey, Jan 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Grant Dixon

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    After wasting 350 dollars and 3 months getting my Nikon scanner
    "repaired" -- it now focuses again but takes 3 times as long as before to
    scan, and frequently crashes -- and then spending another 400 for a flatbed
    scanner to do my contact scans because I don't wish to waste an hour and a
    half of my time doing 500 dpi contact scans of 36 exposure rolls of film. I
    seriously dis-recommend the Nikon. They didn't even answer my complaint
    after the last time I got it back - making them arrogant as well as
    incompetent.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
    "Grant Dixon" <> wrote in message
    news:XWOJb.43451$...
    > I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    > the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    > Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    > regarding your experience and opinions.
    >
    > --
    > Grant
    >
    > Home Pages http://home.cogeco.ca/~grant.dixon/index.htm
    >
    > Challenge Pages http://home.cogeco.ca/~challenge/
    >
    > *********************************************************
    >
    > Creativity is so delicate a flower that praise tends to make it bloom,

    while
    > discouragement often nips it in the bud. Any of us will put out more and
    > better ideas if our efforts are appreciated.
    >
    > Alexander Osborn (1888 - 1966)
    >
    > *********************************************************
    >
    >
    >
    Tony Spadaro, Jan 4, 2004
    #3
  4. Grant Dixon

    HRosita Guest

    >"Tom Thackrey" wrote:

    >I don't know about the Nikon, but the 5400 is great. We've had several slide
    >scanners over the years and this is by far the best.


    Hi,

    I second his opinion. By the way I had a Nikon IV and did not like it at all.
    Without the ICE option, it takes about 1 minute to scan a slide but the
    additional time ICE takes is well worth it. I usually scan at 2700 because I
    really don't print much but the 5700 capability is there if I want it.
    By the way, the 5400 has both firewire and USB connectivity. I get much better
    times with the Firewire.
    Rosita
    HRosita, Jan 4, 2004
    #4
  5. In article <XWOJb.43451$>,
    says...
    > I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    > the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    > Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    > regarding your experience and opinions.
    >
    >

    Visit my web site for several discussions about the Minotla 5400.
    Just follow the tips link on my home page.
    It will do anything you probably want to do with 35mm film, but
    depending upon your output requirements may be more than you need.

    --
    Robert D Feinman
    Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
    http://robertdfeinman.com
    mail:
    Robert D Feinman, Jan 4, 2004
    #5
  6. "Tom Thackrey" <> writes:

    > On 3-Jan-2004, "Grant Dixon" <> wrote:
    >
    >> I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    >> the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    >> Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    >> regarding your experience and opinions.

    >
    > I don't know about the Nikon, but the 5400 is great. We've had several slide
    > scanners over the years and this is by far the best.
    >
    > The scan time is longish on our Mac (90 sec or more) but the results are
    > great. I was tempted by the new Nikon with the 20sec scan time but the 5400
    > is cheaper and available now.


    What settings for that 90 second scan time? I can scan a slide with
    my Nikon LS-2000 in about 60 seconds -- with the "right" settings.
    But with the settings I need to get optimal scans of a lot of my
    actual slides, it takes more than 15 minutes.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 4, 2004
    #6
  7. Grant Dixon

    Andre Denis Guest


    >In article <XWOJb.43451$>,
    > says...
    >> I am tossing the idea around of scanning my own slides instead of farming
    >> the job out. Has anyone have any experience with the Minolta DiMAGE Scan
    >> Elite 5400 and /or the CoolScan V ED? I would appreciate all comments
    >> regarding your experience and opinions.


    I can give you some comments on my experiences using an Epson Perfection
    1250. Pentium 2 266mh, 256megs ram using the Epson Software

    Scanning slides with this model is a slow process due to the optional slide
    scanner set-up only providing for one slide at a time. Other later more
    expensive models have a multiple slide scanning option.

    At first I looked at my inventory of slides and thought this was going to
    be a never-ending job. It did take quite a bit of time, but it was very
    enjoyable and nostalgic viewing what amounts to a little bit of your life
    story one at a time on the screen. So, it all depends on your attitude
    when scanning. The quality will entirely depend on how good your slides
    have been kept over time. You will find that some of them will have
    problems that you didn't know existed until you scan them. Others will
    surprise you at how well they come out.

    The default slide settings on my scanner take about one minute each for
    300dpi. (before any other tweaking you might want to do) I don't know if
    this will increase in time if you use a multiple slide scanner.

    Andre
    Andre Denis, Jan 4, 2004
    #7
  8. "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    SNIP
    > What settings for that 90 second scan time? I can scan a slide with
    > my Nikon LS-2000 in about 60 seconds -- with the "right" settings.
    > But with the settings I need to get optimal scans of a lot of my
    > actual slides, it takes more than 15 minutes.


    They are probably, I get slightly better times on a FireWire interface,
    straight full 5400ppi scans. If you add the Grain Dissolver, times more
    than double because of longer exposure time, and ICE theoretically doubles
    the exposure time once more. However, because ICE is very processor
    intensive, the processor speed is the deciding factor hoe much loner ICE
    really takes. Adding multiple scans of course adds to the total scan time,
    in proportin to the number of averaged scans.

    One should also not forget that a 5400ppi scan provides 82% more data
    (bytes) than a 4000ppi scan, and 300% more data (so 4x as much) than a
    2700ppi scan. This requires a fast interface for the best timing results.

    Bart
    Bart van der Wolf, Jan 5, 2004
    #8
  9. "Bart van der Wolf" <> writes:

    > "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    > news:-b.net...
    > SNIP
    >> What settings for that 90 second scan time? I can scan a slide with
    >> my Nikon LS-2000 in about 60 seconds -- with the "right" settings.
    >> But with the settings I need to get optimal scans of a lot of my
    >> actual slides, it takes more than 15 minutes.

    >
    > They are probably, I get slightly better times on a FireWire interface,
    > straight full 5400ppi scans. If you add the Grain Dissolver, times more
    > than double because of longer exposure time, and ICE theoretically doubles
    > the exposure time once more. However, because ICE is very processor
    > intensive, the processor speed is the deciding factor hoe much loner ICE
    > really takes. Adding multiple scans of course adds to the total scan time,
    > in proportin to the number of averaged scans.


    ICE shouldn't double exposure time, it should add 33% (a fourth
    channel on top of the existing 3), and that's compatible with the
    times I measure on my LS-2000. And I don't find it very processor
    intensive.

    Is the "Grain Dissolver" GEM, or something else? Again, that's
    something I'd really *love*; my old work is all on grainy film, and
    I've always hated grain. I've run the GEM trial plugin, and Neat
    Image and stuff, and haven't found anything I wanted to buy badly
    enough yet.

    My LS-2000 is SCSI interface, I think it transfers data as fast as the
    scanner can provide it.

    > One should also not forget that a 5400ppi scan provides 82% more data
    > (bytes) than a 4000ppi scan, and 300% more data (so 4x as much) than a
    > 2700ppi scan. This requires a fast interface for the best timing results.


    And makes those puny little archive CDs look even *smaller*, yes. :)
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 5, 2004
    #9
  10. "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    > "Bart van der Wolf" <> writes:
    >
    > > "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    > > news:-b.net...
    > > SNIP
    > >> What settings for that 90 second scan time? I can scan a slide with
    > >> my Nikon LS-2000 in about 60 seconds -- with the "right" settings.
    > >> But with the settings I need to get optimal scans of a lot of my
    > >> actual slides, it takes more than 15 minutes.

    > >
    > > They are probably, I get slightly better times on a FireWire

    interface,
    > > straight full 5400ppi scans. If you add the Grain Dissolver, times

    more
    > > than double because of longer exposure time, and ICE theoretically

    doubles
    > > the exposure time once more. However, because ICE is very processor
    > > intensive, the processor speed is the deciding factor hoe much loner

    ICE
    > > really takes. Adding multiple scans of course adds to the total scan

    time,
    > > in proportin to the number of averaged scans.

    >
    > ICE shouldn't double exposure time, it should add 33% (a fourth
    > channel on top of the existing 3), and that's compatible with the
    > times I measure on my LS-2000. And I don't find it very processor
    > intensive.


    The Minolta implementation is different from the LS2000 one. The LS2000
    just adds a fourth (IR) exposure for the single line CCD. The Minolta
    scans an RGB image with a tri-linear CCD, and a second scan with an
    RGB+IR, and the difference equals the IR exposure alone.

    I also have both the LS2000 and the SE5400, and believe me that my
    processor usage goes to max when processing the Minolta ICE implementation
    as the data comes in line by line. That probably takes some pressure off
    of the interface.

    > Is the "Grain Dissolver" GEM, or something else? Again, that's
    > something I'd really *love*; my old work is all on grainy film, and
    > I've always hated grain. I've run the GEM trial plugin, and Neat
    > Image and stuff, and haven't found anything I wanted to buy badly
    > enough yet.


    The Grain Dissolver is a lightsource diffuser, which works fine for
    reducing the graininess, even for silver based Black and White film.

    > My LS-2000 is SCSI interface, I think it transfers data as fast as the
    > scanner can provide it.
    >
    > > One should also not forget that a 5400ppi scan provides 82% more data
    > > (bytes) than a 4000ppi scan, and 300% more data (so 4x as much) than a
    > > 2700ppi scan. This requires a fast interface for the best timing

    results.
    >
    > And makes those puny little archive CDs look even *smaller*, yes. :)


    Yes, two or three full res scans (with 64-bit or 48-bit raw data from
    VueScan or Minolta scan software) per CDR.

    Bart
    Bart van der Wolf, Jan 5, 2004
    #10
  11. Grant Dixon

    HRosita Guest

    Hi,

    I did a scan with the Minolta 5400 and here are some numbers:

    Using the Minolta Easy Scan Utility here are my observations:

    Turning and adjusting focus took about 4 minutes.

    Showing the thumbnail of 4 slides in the holder about 30 seconds

    Scanning at top resolution with ICE enabled and saving the image as TIF: 4
    Minutes

    Image data:

    Size (as shown in Photoshop 7): 19.42x13 inches @ 400 PPI
    7768 pixel x 5200 pixel
    File size: 115.6 MB
    My PC Is a Micron Pentium 4, 3Ghz,1GB RAM


    Rosita
    HRosita, Jan 5, 2004
    #11
  12. Grant Dixon

    HRosita Guest

    Hi again,
    I forgot to mention that my next step will be to use the import function of
    Photoshop to check times.

    Be glad to answer any questions.
    Rosita
    HRosita, Jan 5, 2004
    #12
  13. Grant Dixon

    Ed E. Guest

    I've owned the Minolta Scan Dual and Scan Dual III, and now own the CoolScan
    IV ED. The Minoltas were pretty good but didn't have ICE. The Nikon is
    great. I wish I had the funds to try out the 5400, but the IV ED still does
    everything I need it to.
    Ed E., Jan 6, 2004
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Glen A Stromquist

    film/slide scanners and older HP flatbeds

    Glen A Stromquist, Jan 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    320
    Robert Feinman
    Jan 21, 2004
  2. ScottyBaby

    Recommendations on digital 35mm/slide scanners?

    ScottyBaby, Feb 9, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,944
    Barry Smith
    Feb 11, 2004
  3. Ralph K. Compton

    Slide Scanners

    Ralph K. Compton, Apr 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    597
    JMooreTS
    Apr 6, 2004
  4. Arold \Al\ Green

    slide scanners?

    Arold \Al\ Green, Oct 27, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    543
    Alan Browne
    Oct 28, 2004
  5. David Gintz

    Request For Info: Automatic Slide Scanners

    David Gintz, Apr 15, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    256
    David Gintz
    Apr 21, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page