Lance
Established
Hi fellow film buffs,
I have an Imacon Flextight Photo on trial, and trying to figure out if everything is OK.
The lamp seems to flicker in the lighttable when the scanner is idle, but seems to be stable while scanning. The scans looks unaffected by this. Is this a sign of a lamp that needs changing or normal behaviour?
Also I have had a "pixel jump" in one scan (see below). I tried to scan the image again and it appeared in another place. This is the only image I have seen this in. Is this due to a film "pop" or could it be a bad motor in the scanner. It might be in other images as well, but harder to find. This image has a lot of lines to spot it in.
100% crop from a 645 neg:
Also any thoughts about the Flextight Photo compared to others on the marked is welcomed. IMO it's almost a steal if you can live with SCSI. 3200 ppi is ample for my MF negs, but just enough for 24x36 (about 12 MP).
How about self service - possible/easy? Changing lamp, belts, lubricating etc.
I'm sorry for this long post, but I have had a really hard time finding resources about the Imacon scanners and decision time is coming up fast.
I have an Imacon Flextight Photo on trial, and trying to figure out if everything is OK.
The lamp seems to flicker in the lighttable when the scanner is idle, but seems to be stable while scanning. The scans looks unaffected by this. Is this a sign of a lamp that needs changing or normal behaviour?
Also I have had a "pixel jump" in one scan (see below). I tried to scan the image again and it appeared in another place. This is the only image I have seen this in. Is this due to a film "pop" or could it be a bad motor in the scanner. It might be in other images as well, but harder to find. This image has a lot of lines to spot it in.
100% crop from a 645 neg:
Also any thoughts about the Flextight Photo compared to others on the marked is welcomed. IMO it's almost a steal if you can live with SCSI. 3200 ppi is ample for my MF negs, but just enough for 24x36 (about 12 MP).
How about self service - possible/easy? Changing lamp, belts, lubricating etc.
I'm sorry for this long post, but I have had a really hard time finding resources about the Imacon scanners and decision time is coming up fast.
palec
Well-known
Hello,
AFAIK this model with Firewire instead of SCSI has been sold as Hasselblad Flextight 343.
You can download user manual here:
http://hasselblad.com/media/12e814ac-7a70-4dff-9b75-74f2ac8fcea4-FT343_Manual_English.pdf
There are instructions on replacing the lamp, though it's not the one from lighttable.
I can speak only about FT 343. My guess is that this scanner has been targeted to medium format photographers (other Flextights have limit of 3200 DPI for medium format as well), but it's fine for 35mm as well and it gives very detailed scans. I really like the FlexColor software, though I wish Hasselblad would update it with profiles for newer films. There are tools to help dealing with dense and thin sources and to minimize effect of grain aliasing. The magnetic holders may scratch the film as they are bending during scan so be careful with putting longer piece film than the holder frame.
AFAIK this model with Firewire instead of SCSI has been sold as Hasselblad Flextight 343.
You can download user manual here:
http://hasselblad.com/media/12e814ac-7a70-4dff-9b75-74f2ac8fcea4-FT343_Manual_English.pdf
There are instructions on replacing the lamp, though it's not the one from lighttable.
I can speak only about FT 343. My guess is that this scanner has been targeted to medium format photographers (other Flextights have limit of 3200 DPI for medium format as well), but it's fine for 35mm as well and it gives very detailed scans. I really like the FlexColor software, though I wish Hasselblad would update it with profiles for newer films. There are tools to help dealing with dense and thin sources and to minimize effect of grain aliasing. The magnetic holders may scratch the film as they are bending during scan so be careful with putting longer piece film than the holder frame.
Lance
Established
The bulb specified in the Photo manual is an L 6w/12 950 daylight. I have also read somewhere, that an 8w might work as well. The scanner might not be so picky. If the images are easy to color correct it's fine.
I have found another image with problems. This time a 35mm neg. It seems to affect exposure as well. So I'm guessing the lamp has something to do with it but maybe several problems.
I have found another image with problems. This time a 35mm neg. It seems to affect exposure as well. So I'm guessing the lamp has something to do with it but maybe several problems.
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
I have only rented a flextight on a couple of occasions. The medium format images I had worked fine, but almost all the 4x5's I scanned have the 'pixel jump' like in the image above. In my case it was because of a small tear in the magnet mask on the holder, which prevented it from holding the film tight enough. One of the sheets ended up folding against the curve and got totally mangled in the mechanism, and was destroyed. My advice would be to check and make sure the holders are in good condition, because they are a weak link in the system.
I also had a hard time with the software and color negatives. This was probably due to my unfamiliarity, but setting the black point did not produce workable color files. I ended up rescanning a lot of it on an Epson. Slides and b+w worked well.
My sense is that they are potentially great scanners, but you need to learn how to make them work for you. I think their strength is medium format. I found 35mm handling with the holders rather cumbersome, and 4x5 seemed easy enough but didn't deliver.
I also had a hard time with the software and color negatives. This was probably due to my unfamiliarity, but setting the black point did not produce workable color files. I ended up rescanning a lot of it on an Epson. Slides and b+w worked well.
My sense is that they are potentially great scanners, but you need to learn how to make them work for you. I think their strength is medium format. I found 35mm handling with the holders rather cumbersome, and 4x5 seemed easy enough but didn't deliver.
Lance
Established
Fortunately I don't shoot 4x5 and the Flextight Photo does not scan 4x5. That is one problem solved... 
The holders seems to be ok. Not overly used.
The holders seems to be ok. Not overly used.
mickster
Member
The artifact in the 2nd image looks more like banding than a 'skip'; one test would be to see if it appears in the same place on every scan. I experienced this banding when scanning 5x4 on an Imacon - the Hasselblad tech said it was caused by dust / dirt building up on the CCD & solution was to have the scanner cleaned and serviced. This solved the issue.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
This has nothing to do with the light.
The software that interprets the data from the scanner itself relies on many factors (mechanical, electrical, etc.), and when there is a "hiccup" along the way, the software can only do so much.
This is where multiple-pass scanning comes in handy (properly-engineered software can discard the odd differences). I know nothing about Hasselblad's/Imacon's software nor any third-party offers, but if it's available (multiple-pass scanning) I'd do it. I always do when I scan. Some people think it's a waste of time (specially the "who cares!"-ists), but this is one very strong reason to do multiple pass scanning.
The software that interprets the data from the scanner itself relies on many factors (mechanical, electrical, etc.), and when there is a "hiccup" along the way, the software can only do so much.
This is where multiple-pass scanning comes in handy (properly-engineered software can discard the odd differences). I know nothing about Hasselblad's/Imacon's software nor any third-party offers, but if it's available (multiple-pass scanning) I'd do it. I always do when I scan. Some people think it's a waste of time (specially the "who cares!"-ists), but this is one very strong reason to do multiple pass scanning.
Lance
Established
It was never in the same place. The reason why I think the cause for the second picture is the light is that the image is darker to one side of the line. The scanner had been on for several hours and the lamp was flickering a lot before the scan. It seemed steady during scan, but might be less stable. This is just my guess.
I replaced the bulb today, and there is no flickering and I have not seen this specific problem again in about 6 scans. That is not much to go by, but still.
The second problem (the first picture) I now believe is a neg pop. The 645 holder is further down on the plate than the 6x6 or 6x9 so I think it has to bend more going in to the scanner. I have scanned the same neg about 5 times in the 645 holder with this line going through the window. Not exactly the same place. And when I scanned it in the 6x9 holder there was nothing.
I replaced the bulb today, and there is no flickering and I have not seen this specific problem again in about 6 scans. That is not much to go by, but still.
The second problem (the first picture) I now believe is a neg pop. The 645 holder is further down on the plate than the 6x6 or 6x9 so I think it has to bend more going in to the scanner. I have scanned the same neg about 5 times in the 645 holder with this line going through the window. Not exactly the same place. And when I scanned it in the 6x9 holder there was nothing.