mani
Well-known
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.
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
Snorting silver salts
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...
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
The best camera is one that still works!
... or getting it right at the point of manufacture!
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
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
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
Well-known
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
Well-known
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
Well-known
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.
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
-
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
Well-known
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
Member
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.
I think so too, Johnny. A good point.
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.
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.
I think so too, Johnny. A good point.
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
Well-known
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
Member
sny
Member
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.
Regards,
S.
hanskerensky
Well-known
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
Well-known
And here an image of the bottom of same holder.
Note the metal plate. Probably there to add stability to the holder.
Note the metal plate. Probably there to add stability to the holder.
wblynch
Well-known
Looks like you've got a broken hammer on that C key
SURF
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
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
Back to film
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.