The OFFICIAL Plustek 120 post your scans

[mani]

Could the problem be solved by Plustek (or a third party) producing film holders that can be height-adjusted? Aren't there adjustable film holders for flatbed scanners which could work as a model to develop new holders for the 120?
I can't see Plustek re-engineering the scanner to allow for auto-focus, so adjustable film holders might be an economic solution?

Just wondering here - the good scans look really good to me.

 

[johannielscom]

Somebody should get into 3D-printing those holders if Plustek don't come up with them.

From reading the trouble you guys have with this latest-and-greatest, it seems there's some money to be made with height-adjustable film holders...

 

[Keith]

Somebody should get into 3D-printing those holders if Plustek don't come up with them.

From reading the trouble you guys have with this latest-and-greatest, it seems there's some money to be made with height-adjustable film holders...

... or getting it right at the point of manufacture!

 

[johannielscom]

Ok, so just out of curiosity i measured the filmplane height of 3 holders on my measurement bench with a micrometer with 0.01mm resolution. Measured on the edge were the film rests on at the position of a T crossing because there the material has the most stifness.

Results when i take the 6x9 holder as reference :
6x9 Holder 0
35mm Holder +0.03mm
6x6 Holder +0.04mm

This is quite a good result and surely not the cause of the approx. 0.6 mm focus error that i experience.

Hans,

is it at all possible to crack the scanner open and shim the optical unit for this 0.6mm difference? Or grind the plastic down to make the optical unit sit 0.6mms further away from the film plane?

Might be a bit early (and possibly costly...) to try this now, but in your expert opinion, would it at all be possible?

I'm certainly not getting aboard now, but might pick one up in the future and give this a try if it is possible at all...

 

[XFer]

I'm interested in this scanner, too, despite all the issues.
A negative offset (film too near to the lens) may be cured by shimming the holder; not with carton strips, but permanently with thin brass strips.
But what if the film (holder carriage, actually) is too far from the lens?
Big issue.

3rd-party adjustable holders may be great, but nobody produced 3d-party filmscanner holders up to now. Flatbed holders, yes. Filmscanner holders are much more complicated.

Fingers crossed.

Fernando

 

[hanskerensky]

Hans,

is it at all possible to crack the scanner open and shim the optical unit for this 0.6mm difference? Or grind the plastic down to make the optical unit sit 0.6mms further away from the film plane?

Might be a bit early (and possibly costly...) to try this now, but in your expert opinion, would it at all be possible?

I'm certainly not getting aboard now, but might pick one up in the future and give this a try if it is possible at all...

Guess so Johan but i didn't check that because there is a big "warranty void if broken" seal on the underside of the scanner 🙁

However, the sensor/optics are static (the filmholder moves during scanning) so guess it might be possible to adjust the sensor/optics module to the correct height.

Or maybe even find out when opening the unit that there is allready some kind of adjustment mechanism inside.

Don't worry, i only open it when instructed by Plustek or after the warranty has ended (another 2 years wait).

In the meantime i didn't receive any response yet of Plustek Support. Did send a complaint and images on Sunday evening.
Let's give them another day before climbing in the phone 🙂

 

[hanskerensky]

But what if the film (holder carriage, actually) is too far from the lens?
Big issue.

Fernando

That was my fear too Fernando ! The holder is quite thick so taping the film to its underside is no option.

Luckily in my case it didn't turn out that way 🙂

Still another note, in my case shimming the holders to raise the filmplane did turn out to be a feasable option for the moment. There is however a limit to the shimming as the filmholder will not close properly anymore when it gets too "thick" inside !

 

[mani]

Basing on what I've seen of the film holders, making this work would depend on raising or lowering only the central part of the holder - that is, just the part that actually holds the film, not the ratchet or frame. To me (never having held the holders myself) it looks as though there should be enough space there to raise or lower the film plane by at least a few millimeters, which should be enough to cover the <1mm errors that are being discussed here.

Naturally the tricky parts would be:
- what mechanism could raise/lower the film plane evenly across its entire width and length?
- how much trial and error would be needed finding the perfect plane of focus?

Not perfect, but just an idea. Seems like a good candidate for a Kickstarter project.

 

[XFer]

Not perfect, but just an idea. Seems like a good candidate for a Kickstarter project.

Mani, this is a really nice idea.

Of course I'd like to see Plustek addressing the issue (maybe with new, adjustable, stock holders, given for free to existing customers), but if not... great idea. 🙂

Fernando

 

[mani]

Of course I'd like to see Plustek addressing the issue (maybe with new, adjustable, stock holders, given for free to existing customers), but if not...

Yup - let's see what Plustek come up with. I'm just a little concerned that the scanner was in development for so long, and they didn't notice (or didn't want to notice) the problem before launch - in spite of your warnings on this forum.
This machine has so much promise if they iron out the apparent variabilities.

 

[SURF]

Hi! It's my first post here, though I was reading for months.

First of all the scanner works as can be expected. Also it is expected that it will be not that easy to manual focus the thing precisely even if opened. And there is no way to get best focus (it can not autofocus). And I feel that the best focus is what the 5300 dpi scanner should do. So glass holders are the only perfect way for different films in that scanner.

And seeing all these out-of-focus-problems I seriously doubt the great DOF the lens in this scanner is supposed to have.

I think so too, Johnny. A good point.

There is no sense in modifying the filmholders. The mis-adjustment of the focus must be corrected at its source inside the scanner. A job which (if still in warranty) only Plustek can perform. This will be a mechanical job so guess that the scanner has to be sent back to Plustek Support.
I mailed my complaint this evening to Plustek Support acompanied with photos which clearly show that my scanner is about 0.6mm out of focus. Hope they have a fast (and customer friendly) reaction !
Good thing to note is that once the scanner is in focus (i raised the filmguide with carton strips) it gives nice results so keep your spirit up !

Hans, have a look at it at a different point of view. You are ready to experiment with 0.6 mm thick glass holder and it will be impossible once they will tune it.

Best luck to all
Al

PS. It would be nice if one of Plustek 120 owners will scan a piece of film twice - the second time after rotating it in filmholder 90 degrees. The preffered resolution is 3000 dpi. Or if that will be hard to manage in the filmholder - put the same film in a 6-7 mm different position. I will use that images and will post the results about its geometrical behavior, compared with other scanners that I know. 1000x1000 100% will be fine for that.

 

[rodt16s]

Yup - let's see what Plustek come up with. I'm just a little concerned that the scanner was in development for so long, and they didn't notice (or didn't want to notice) the problem before launch - in spite of your warnings on this forum.
This machine has so much promise if they iron out the apparent variabilities.

It's not like their first Rodeo with scanners.

Surely a DFMEA, would of highlighted many of these basic issues

Hmm.. Design down to a cost and sacrifice the fundamentals, sounds familiar these days.

 

[rdocksey]

PS. It would be nice if one of Plustek 120 owners will scan a piece of film twice - the second time after rotating it in filmholder 90 degrees. The preffered resolution is 3000 dpi. Or if that will be hard to manage in the filmholder - put the same film in a 6-7 mm different position. I will use that images and will post the results about its geometrical behavior, compared with other scanners that I know. 1000x1000 100% will be fine for that.

like this?


piano by push2black, on Flickr


piano_90ccw by push2black, on Flickr

 

[sny]

I'm still waiting for Plustek Germany to solve my problem. They told me they had to contact Taïwan and that this may take some time because of the chineese new year. I hope I will finally get an answer, because for now, the scanner is still at home and out of focus...

Regards,

S.

 

[hanskerensky]

Here an image of part of the 6x6 Filmholder of the Opticfilm 120. The hinged part of the frame is kept closed by 2 magnets. If you need to shim the filmplane very much chances are that the hinged part will not be kept close anymore.

 

[hanskerensky]

And here an image of the bottom of same holder.
Note the metal plate. Probably there to add stability to the holder.

 

[wblynch]

Looks like you've got a broken hammer on that C key 😉

like this?


piano by push2black, on Flickr

 

[SURF]

like this?

Thanks a lot Richard. Exactly.

I see no periodical geometrical distortion. That's very good. There is a diagonal distortion and I think this is because the film is not perfectly flat. Distortion looks like the one of Nicon 9000 without glass filmholders.

Here an image of part of the 6x6 Filmholder of the Opticfilm 120. The hinged part of the frame is kept closed by 2 magnets. If you need to shim the filmplane very much chances are that the hinged part will not be kept close anymore.

Very helpful pictures. From the first look it is possible to disasamble it and remove all unnecessary parts. 🙂 There is a lot of screws and it should be reversible.

Best luck
Al

 

[TRIODEROB]

this is what is wonderful about the internet.

a product is released to the public and there is immediate feedback.
Plustek MUST address the issues in a very quick manner or they will be harmed finacially.

Not like the old days were a product could just float because information did not circulate so rapidly.

 

[wintoid]

I don't know much but the holders look nicely made to me. Doesn't solve the problem, but does make me a bit more interested if they sort out the teething troubles.