Microtek ArtixScan M1?

[ItsReallyDarren]

It took me a while learning how to use the scanner.

Have you had a chance to use the MF holders? For me its really hit or miss, sometimes the holders tilt the film at an angle, other times it adds more curl between the rubber strips.

Ive also noticed that Silverfast scans the image however it sees it, theres almost no difference when I alter the histogram and curves. The only input that seems to change anything is the "Exposure" slider.

 

[Nando]

I haven't put any medium format film through it yet. I only made two 35mm scans so far. Next week will be the last week of school (I'm a teacher) before the summer break. I'll have more time to tinker with this thing then. I have about 10 or so rolls of 120 film that I need to develop and scan.

 

[kram]

Hope the back gets better. Carry on with the reports, very interested. Cheers.

 

[kram]

Calling M1 owners - how good is it. How does it compare to the V750?

 

[venchka]

Same here!

Same here!

Calling M1 owners - how good is it. How does it compare to the V750?

I want to know too. How about a comparison of the V700-V750 with Better Scanning holders versus the M1?

"Bueller?
Bueller?
Anybody?"

 

[ederek]

I have an M1 and am very happy with its performance, but have no experience with the V750 or other dedicated film scanners.

The holders are decent (used only the 135 negative and Slide holders so far). The holder for the 135 Negatives hold 4 strips of 6 Frames. Found that with 6 frames, the last frame can curl slightly, and it seems better with only 5 frames per strip. Would be nice if they were a couple mm wider, but are ok.

The software has a great "Batch" mode. It only takes me a couple minutes to load the 4 strips into the holder followed by a brush for dust. The software requires less than 30 seconds to set filenames and start the process. Result is 4 new Tiff files (can start editing the first strip in Photoshop while the other 3 continue to scan, each strip is a unique filename).

I scan at 4800 dpi, in either 16-bit for B&W or 48-bit for Color. A strip is about 175 Megs for B&W and 475 Megs for Color. I think it takes about 15 minutes or so per strip.

I do not adjust any settings from batch to batch or strip to strip. Have identified the d-range needed for TriX, and have all strips set to use this range (a little extra on either end to ensure nothing is clipped).

The only problem so far is that the Color Profiling / Calibration routine crashed. May need to reinstall that module, or update to latest version. There are two Color Calibration targets provided with the unit for a controlled color workflow (I calibrate monitors, printer, and will have scanner part of the color management as well).

If deciding to buy a dedicated film scanner again today, would choose the same model.

 

[Nando]

I love my M1 but I can't compare it directly to the V7xx because I don't have access to any Epsons. I still prefer my Nikon Coolscan V ED for 35mm. The M1 holders are pretty easy to use once I got used to them.

The most difficult hurdle for me was learning the Silverfast software. I find it quite difficult but I'm getting the hang of it. I really wished that Vuescan supported the M1 as I prefer it over Silverfast. Another hurtle was my old computer. I found that 2gB of RAM wasn't enough to handle big 4800dpi MF files efficiently in Photoshop. To be honest, I rarely scan MF at the full 4800dpi but I'd like to be able to handle it. The problem gets worse with 4x5 large-format even when scanning at 2400 or 1800dpi. The files are just really huge. I've since upgraded to a new computer - its still slow but manageable.

 

[Pherdinand]

I have an epson v700. The largest print i made so far, from 35mm scanned by the v700, was 50x60 cm. Most of the image is out of focus🙂 but it looks very very good. It is an acros 100 frame. I am quite happy with the performance of the machine, although it does produce lots of noise in the dark areas 🙁 . The ICE is a blessing for c41 and slide film.

I have also scanned 6x6 and, lately 6x9 slides on it. I think it outperforms my camera+handholding+focusing abilities. 🙂

I could only compare it to a minolta scan dual IV or cheap flatbeds. Resolution-wise, i have nothing to complain about. The minolta produces less noise by multiple scanning, though, and marginally more shadow details.

 

[venchka]

Nando-fuhgettabout those 4,800 DPI scans. The machine's (consumer flatbeds) real hardware resolution tops out at or below 2,400. Probably closer to 2,100 DPI.

Here's a review of the M1. A real review. Not the kind of infomercials that came out when the machine was released.

M1 Review

 

[Nando]

Nando-fuhgettabout those 4,800 DPI scans. The machine's (consumer flatbeds) real hardware resolution tops out at or below 2,400. Probably closer to 2,100 DPI

Wayne,

I know that the M1 maxes out at much less than 4800dpi. I don't normally scan that high. I just wanted to see if my computer was capable of handling 48-bit 600mB+ files. I will be scanning 4x5's negatives eventually and even if scanning at 2100dpi, the files are going to be huge - probably over 600mB too. My old machine was descent for a 5-year-old PC - it had an AMD 64FX chip and 2gB of RAM. Just cropping the edges slightly on a 600mB+ scan took close to a minute to do in Photoshop. Merging 3-4 layers took around 2 minutes. A fast computer with plenty of RAM is required if you want to post-process large scans efficiently.

 

[venchka]

I scan 4x5 negs. on a friend's Epson 4990 in 16 bit greyscale at 1800 DPI. Those files are about 130Mb. I have to scan at that resolution because Adobe Lightroom won't open a file larger than 10,000 pixels on the long side. Bummer!

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

Nando-fuhgettabout those 4,800 DPI scans. The machine's (consumer flatbeds) real hardware resolution tops out at or below 2,400. Probably closer to 2,100 DPI.

Here's a review of the M1. A real review. Not the kind of infomercials that came out when the machine was released.

M1 Review

Maybe Im not looking at the page carefully but I dont see a review of the M1 scanner.

 

[venchka]

Oops!

Oops!

Maybe Im not looking at the page carefully but I dont see a review of the M1 scanner.

My mistake. Sorry about that.

M1 Review

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

My mistake. Sorry about that.

M1 Review

Interesting article about the scanner. What struck my attention was hearing how Multi-Exposure and Multi-Scanning not only worked but improved the quality of the scans.

Ever since I got my M1 in February Ive tried everything to make the Multi functions work on my scanner without any luck. When using any of the multi functions the image comes out horribly soft or barely recognizable. I have since been using a plain 1pass scan which has given me good results. I think Ill have to contact Microtek to figure out a solution.

 

[venchka]

Good luck! Please keep us posted on your progress.

 

[astroman]

Does the Microtek M1 produce as good of a 35mm scan as a Nikon coolscan V?? Please I need to know before I spend the cash.

 

[Nando]

Does the Microtek M1 produce as good of a 35mm scan as a Nikon coolscan V?? Please I need to know before I spend the cash.

I have both. I find the Nikon makes better scans but if you want to do medium format and large format scans in addition to 35mm, I'd go with the M1. I never thought I'd go larger than 35mm but then I got medium-format GAS - so now I have two scanners. 🙂

Here's a link to my original comparison:
http://saultphotography.forumotion....on-coolscan-v-ed-warning-huge-photos-t199.htm

 

[Erik L]

Does the Microtek M1 produce as good of a 35mm scan as a Nikon coolscan V?? Please I need to know before I spend the cash.

do they sell the "F1" version in canada

 

[astroman]

Thanks Nando.🙂

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

Good luck! Please keep us posted on your progress.

Sent in a request for help to Lasersoft about a week ago, they requested a copy of my preferences folder to see if they could recreate the issues Ive been having. Just got this reply, hopefully a new update will be out soon along with a few fixes for my M1.

Ill update when I can get a hold of any patches or fixes.

good news - testing center personnel could sort of verify the problem.
However, although the issue is slightly different over here, it looks similar
enough that we might start to tackle the problem with our programming staff.

Therefore this case has been handed over to the developing department.

However, the issue also occurs with Microtek's own scanning software solution,
the "Scanwizard" (actually, even more so). Therefore it might be "something
outside SilverFast" (e.g. driver, firmware) that we cannot easily fix.

As soon as I learn of version that is regarded bugfixed concerning this issue,
I shall immediately inform you about the release number so that you can
download that one.

Thank you for helping us to go one step further 🙂

Mit freundlichen Gruessen,
Sönke Noack
- LSI Director Support, Software Test & Mastermaking -