Post your drum scans (aka the first official Drum Scanners thread)

I think the scans are wonderful, but the geek in me would like to see a 20x enlargement inset of some highly detailed part...
:)
 
dave lackey said:
The copper mine...amazing. What camera and lens did you shoot that with?
Click to expand...

Cheers Dave,

Wideangle is shot with a Takumar 35mm f4.5 fisheye, the other with SMC 200mm f4. My usual handheld shots with Pentax 67 - there goes the "massive-mirror-slapping conspiracy" theory out of the window about the blurry handheld shots with the P67 system. :)

Some more handheld shots from the same place:



Here I tried a silly thing and scanned a crop with 11000 ppi (745 MegaPixel/0.75 Gigapixel equivalent for 6x7 whole frame) so that's by no means really practical on most C41 negative films.

But the point for this silly test was that out of curiosity I wanted to see if I can just at least see a guy from the World's biggest truck's window so I pushed it out with levels, but I'm not sure I can see any guy or a orange helmet or not? :]

(this particular truck is on the the top picture in the top row of mining vehicles 4th from left to right - note I pushed this crop to extreme out to see the shadows, so it's not so dark as the original)


Can you find those cars on the previous pic? :)
 
If you can operate that motorcycle of yours, you surely can hold a Pentax 6x7 very steadily with relative ease. :p Joking apart, these are amazing pictures (scanning is only important afterwards). Please keep sharing these beauties.

I look forward to seeing some drum scanning related videos from you soon. :)

Bests,

Ashfaque
 
This thread, however, is paramount to what film is capable of. Take, for instance, the dumptruck shot @ 11kdpi.



That's around 700 *megapixels* of data for 56x70mm. Now, obviously one doesn't have to scan that high all the time - but I can't say I'd agree that a 4kdpi scan would contain the same micro-detail. This is "just" medium format, as well.

Amazing stuff.
 
Leafscan 45

Leafscan 45

Back in March I bought a Leafscan 45 from ebay that was physically located very close to me. Since then I have cleaned it, replaced the bulb and filters. I also bought a glass mount so I can wet mount my film. All this without any scanning experience, but what the hell why not give it a shot.

I won't get into all of the bloody details about how many scsi cards I bought or why I have two G5's and a PC box laying around. Not to mention the problem with Silverfast and that it CANNOT scan a 3x12 cm strip @5080dpi in both SF for Windows or SF for Mac with out a) totally crashing on the Windows machine or b) distorting the image on the Mac side. Does not matter if I use a Ratoc adapter, Scsi card, OSX, OS9 or Windows XP... But I won't get into all of that. Bottom line for me if I want to scan a 6x9 negative at 5080dpi and then stitch them together then I have to use OS9 and the leafscan 2.2 plugin for photoshop. In my case photoshop 5.

But hey I like a project :)

My setup today is a Mac G4 running OS9.2, PhotoShop 5 with the Leafscan 2.2 plugin for Scsi. Scsi Card is 2930 I believe. I forget after testing so many in the G5. I transfer my files wirelessly using an old version of Dave by Thursbay Software.

I developed my first roll of black and white in my life less than a year ago (I'm 52) and since then found a Jobo CPA-2 w/lift on Craigslist for $50.00 and started doing color. I'm hooked. I now have two MF cameras, Bronics SQ-ai and a Fuji GW690II.

As long as I am having fun then I will keep doing it.

The leafscan requires 3 full passes so lucky for me I don't take a lot of shots!

Cheers,

Ned
 
nbagno said:
Not to mention the problem with Silverfast and that it CANNOT scan a 3x12 cm strip @5080dpi in both SF for Windows or SF for Mac with out a) totally crashing on the Windows machine or b) distorting the image on the Mac side.
Click to expand...

I bet this is some kind of memory/buffer issue related to SF and/or Windows itself. 30x120mm@5080, 48-bits, is 823MB. Have you tried scanning at 8-bit/channel or in black and white with these 30x120mm images? It'd be interesting to see if that solves the issue. Then again it's a 6000x24000px image and there may be some other kind of internal limitation.
 
I didn't think SCSI cards work in OS X or with a G5. I could be wrong there just I've never heard anyone getting one to work in any version of OS X.
I too think the highlights are films ace in the hole, congrats on your results and your persistence.
 
nbagno said:
I won't get into all of the bloody details about how many scsi cards I bought or why I have two G5's and a PC box laying around. Not to mention the problem with Silverfast and that it CANNOT scan a 3x12 cm strip @5080dpi in both SF for Windows or SF for Mac with out a) totally crashing on the Windows machine or b) distorting the image on the Mac side. Does not matter if I use a Ratoc adapter, Scsi card, OSX, OS9 or Windows XP... But I won't get into all of that. Bottom line for me if I want to scan a 6x9 negative at 5080dpi and then stitch them together then I have to use OS9 and the leafscan 2.2 plugin for photoshop. In my case photoshop 5.

But hey I like a project :)
Click to expand...

Welcome! Nice shot Ned and thanks for the awesome very first post in the RFF.

Although Leafscan 45 is a CCD scanner, but definitely a high-end side of the scanners.

Know what you mean about SCSI annoyance - it's a tech-adventure in its own to "develop" a stable running scanning combo (SCSI scanner+SCSI computer). I've also replaced multiple computers and SCSI cards, from G3 to G4 and a lot of annoying time wasted on unstable running and experimenting with different hardware/software settings.


clayne said:
I bet this is some kind of memory/buffer issue related to SF and/or Windows itself. 30x120mm@5080, 48-bits, is 823MB. Have you tried scanning at 8-bit/channel or in black and white with these 30x120mm images? It'd be interesting to see if that solves the issue. Then again it's a 6000x24000px image and there may be some other kind of internal limitation.
Click to expand...

Yep, there are often internal hardware limits. Especially on CCD scanners since they take the samples in multi-pixel "chunks" thus the lens-distortions and sample-merging processes can start to play in distorting/degrading the overall image and geometry. I.e. Hasselblad/Imacon high-end CCD-scanners, where you can scan small 35mm frame up to some 6300-8000ppi while the same scanner is limited to 3200 for 120 film or only 2050ppi for 4x5" film since for the CCD array it's technically complicated to handle large surfaces with this particular technology. Hasselblad users also often stich multiple multiple scans, but the software-merging creates its own set of quality- and geomery degrading problems. With drum scanners there aren't such internal hardware limits since it scans single-pixel-at-a-time, but often it's the software side that limits - usually it's max 2GB per frame (too big files to handle during rendering/copying, especially with the older computers that those SCSI machines usually were). But there are ways around and some high-end scanning softwares natively allow a lot more, some even rediculous 20GB+ per frame.

Margus
 
Hi Margus,

Joining this thread abit late. I agree with your assessment of PMT scanners and CCD scanners. I used various drum scanners and flatbed scanners in my professional work experience The PMT drum scanner delivers the best overall tonal range among the flatbed scanners. Not to say that flatbed scanners are bad, but in the hands of an excellent scanner operator with the correct software, the final product would be as good as a drum scan.
I currently have and use the following film scanner Canon FS4000US, Imacon Precision II, and Scitex-Creo Eversmart Pro II. Because of the limitation of legacy software, I have several options to run my scanners in the best possible mode. Currently using SCSI cable, I can use the Canon & Scitex in OX9.2 up to OS10.1 (Scitex) and OS10.4 Tiger (Canon). The Canon has an option of either SCSI or USB, thus with the original software up to OS10.4.
The Scitex can be expanded up to OS10.5.1 and maybe OS10.5.8 (Snow Leopard) with the very lat version of software and a Ratoc FRS1x adapter.
The Imacon, as far as I know up to Snow Leopard with the Ratoc. The Imacon has the original SCSI connection. Luckly for me I have several new Ratoc.
 
I can confirm that :bang: at least with my Leafscan. I did have several cards that were recognized by OSX and the drivers were loaded so I assume that it would have worked with something. I did see a report that an Acard AEC-67162M card works with a Leafscan but I searched for a couple of months without finding one. It would have crapped out on a 3x12cm scan anyway.

By the way, awesome images in this thread... Oh and Hi, this is my second post... been lurking for awhile.


Photo_Smith said:
I didn't think SCSI cards work in OS X or with a G5. I could be wrong there just I've never heard anyone getting one to work in any version of OS X.
I too think the highlights are films ace in the hole, congrats on your results and your persistence.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the welcome.

Very very annoying. I spent hours with different combinations of computers, cards and Operating systems. Not to mention time and money. The thing is, OS9 and the ancient scsi plugin works perfectly for scanning that 3x12 cm strip. It's just Silverfast can't handle it. The only issue with the scsi plugin was it would crash if I selected 16bit scan, but the fix was to disable the OS9 speech extension :)

I love doing things with my hands, so shooting film and scanning is fulfilling that need.

tsiklonaut said:
Welcome! Nice shot Ned and thanks for the awesome very first post in the RFF.

Although Leafscan 45 is a CCD scanner, but definitely a high-end side of the scanners.

Know what you mean about SCSI annoyance - it's a tech-adventure in its own to "develop" a stable running scanning combo (SCSI scanner+SCSI computer). I've also replaced multiple computers and SCSI cards, from G3 to G4 and a lot of annoying time wasted on unstable running and experimenting with different hardware/software settings.




Yep, there are often internal hardware limits. Especially on CCD scanners since they take the samples in multi-pixel "chunks" thus the lens-distortions and sample-merging processes can start to play in distorting/degrading the overall image and geometry. I.e. Hasselblad/Imacon high-end CCD-scanners, where you can scan small 35mm frame up to some 6300-8000ppi while the same scanner is limited to 3200 for 120 film or only 2050ppi for 4x5" film since for the CCD array it's technically complicated to handle large surfaces with this particular technology. Hasselblad users also often stich multiple multiple scans, but the software-merging creates its own set of quality- and geomery degrading problems. With drum scanners there aren't such internal hardware limits since it scans single-pixel-at-a-time, but often it's the software side that limits - usually it's max 2GB per frame (too big files to handle during rendering/copying, especially with the older computers that those SCSI machines usually were). But there are ways around and some high-end scanning softwares natively allow a lot more, some even rediculous 20GB+ per frame.

Margus
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom