problem with multisampling mode with siverfast and mac

[luuca]

hi, I have a reflecta rps 7200 and the software silverscan runnig under mac.

I've tried to use the multisampling function (I set it only at 2x) but every time the scanner begins the second scan, the software crashes...

any suggestion?

it takes too space to scan at 7200 so I hoped to use this function to improve quality without increasing file-size.

 

[palec]

If you talk about space, do you have enough of it on your startup disk?
I would send generated crash log to LaserSoft support.

 

[luuca]

If you talk about space, do you have enough of it on your startup disk?
I would send generated crash log to LaserSoft support.

I have enough space, but I scan many films and I cannot save 200 MB of tiff for each img (the equivalent of 7200dpi with my scanner)...

 

[amateriat]

luuca: You need to fill us in about the Mac you're using (model, processor/speed, amount of RAM & free hard disk space). Big scans need large-ish amounts of all (or at least most of) the above.


- Barrett

 

[runny]

I am really not sure you need to go to the extravagance of 7200dpi either - 4000dpi or so is about the limit of film. Their should be a huge difference in size of files and speed with the lower resolution. Go too high and all you get is better resolution grain which is not very helpful. That is one reason why the fabulous Nikon scanners top out at 4000dpi.

David

 

[Matus]

SIlverfast is definitely not what it wants to be - a professional software. I use it with my Microtek F1 and it is buggy, slow and unstable. It does the job, but it is not what I would expect.

For your case - go down to 4000 spi and compare to a scan made at 7200 and down sample to 4000 spi. I do not believe you will be able to see a difference.

 

[luuca]

I have a Imac I7 27'' with 12gb ram and 1 tb hard disk (almost empty).

I think the problem is the buffer of the usb connection, because nothin happen using multisampling with lower dpi.

in future I will go with a single scan @7200 then resampled at 12 or 18 mpx to get best results and affordable size-files (60mb)


@runny: I know 7200dpi is stupid... the problem is that they are not REAL 7200dpi... a couple of reviews say that they are circa 3600-3800. the rest of informations are redundant and not usefull, that's because I downsample the img, they are 200mb files with 60 mb infos...

look at here: http://www.filmscanner.info/ReflectaRPS7200.html

You are right, silverfast is a sort of bulky, slow, bugged software... but I paid for it, so I have to use it 😛

 

[thegman]

Hey Luca, try out the free demo of Vuescan, see how it does, I've used the multiple-pass option on that, seems fine to me. If you can afford that lovely iMac, you can afford Vuescan! 🙂

 

[luuca]

I thought vuescan didn't work with reflecta rps7200...

I've tried a demo 2 months ago and it didn't recognize the scanner. that's why I went to silverfast.

 

[luuca]

I don't know, I've made some try and I see more detail in a 7200 downsampled to 3600 than in a 3600 scan.

You must take in consideration that 3600 dpi too are not real... at least on my scanner, judging by what they say here: http://www.filmscanner.info/ReflectaRPS7200.html