>> I bought one of these, with the bulk feeder, to scan in a few thousand
>> slides.
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
>
> PS - remove THE.OBVIOUS to reply off group!
What do you have to digitise are they only 35mm slides and what do your
require as the end result?
As a slide scanner may not be the answer.
r
Dudley Simons - 29 Jun 2009 14:51 GMT
>>> I bought one of these, with the bulk feeder, to scan in a few thousand
>>> slides.
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>
> r
I take it you mean digitising the slides by shooting them with a camera?
I have a Bowens Illumitran which I have used in the past to digitize
slides very successfully with a Nikon D2X.
regards
Dudley
Rob - 29 Jun 2009 17:30 GMT
>>>> I bought one of these, with the bulk feeder, to scan in a few thousand
>>>> slides.
[quoted text clipped - 61 lines]
>
> Dudley
Thats what I use, results are satisfactory, quick to use, small file
size etc.
Slides or tranny stuff that's for critical use are scanned.
But for most yes just copy them with the Bowens with the bulbs.
Very rarely does the scanner get used.
r
>> I bought one of these, with the bulk feeder, to scan in a few thousand
>> slides.
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>files as it goes rather than trying to leave them all open within
>Photoshop or CS. Is the scanning ap any good?
The software is Nikon's own and can save to BMP, TIFF, Jpeg etc. It is
clunky but works. Loads of options for things like dust removal (does
a double scan) and enhancement which I never used.
I scanned the lot into uncompressed TIFFs, about 80MB each, and then
batch-reduced them in Photoshop into ~ 7MB Jpegs - simply because I
*hope* that PS does a better job of it than any other software out
there. It is certainly practically impossible to see a difference with
the naked eye, at 100% zoom.
>Any problems with the bulk feed mechanism. I guess that any slightly dog
>eared kodachromes will have to be remounted into plastic, but how does
>it cope with ultra thin Leitz mounts and old GAF mounts that are as
>thick as paving slabs? Did you run any glass mounted slides through it?
> Or slides with sticky labels that are lifting at the corners etc?
I didn't have problems with any slides, 1970s onwards. Damaged ones
won't work, sure, but I didn't have any of those. I did scan glass
mounted ones too. The feeder takes about 50 at a time.
I think if you will have problems then it might be with the very thin
paper ones. But for me everything worked.
>Did you find any 'gotchas' - those less than endearing short comings in
>the software, scanner design or functionality that you only find out
>once you start using it in anger?
The software is a bit odd in the way it works but once you suss it, it
just runs and runs.
The quality is stunning - as good as the film itself ever managed.
I am uploading some images here
http://www.zen74158.zen.co.uk/ed5000/
One of these, file3012.jpg, was used to compare the ED5000 against
another Nikon scanner costing about £5000 and neither myself nor the
shop could see any difference.
>Any pointers would be much appreciated - and good luck with findig a
>buyer. :o)
Well, mine will be for sale; looking for about £500 :) In original
packaging, with cables, software, etc.
I was quoted a min of 50p each for commercial scanning, and one firm
wanted £10 each!
My email is above but replace o with 0 and 0 with o.
>regards
>
>Dudley
>
>PS - remove THE.OBVIOUS to reply off group!
Dudley Simons - 30 Jun 2009 14:43 GMT
>>> I bought one of these, with the bulk feeder, to scan in a few thousand
>>> slides.
[quoted text clipped - 82 lines]
>>
>> PS - remove THE.OBVIOUS to reply off group!
Hi Peter
Well thats pretty much what I had hoped to hear - would have been
interested to know how well the dust removal system worked and how much
longer it took. We have an old Monolta which does a multiple scan dust
removal thang. It works reasonably well but takes forever to do one scan.
regards
Dudley
Peter - 30 Jun 2009 20:53 GMT
>Well thats pretty much what I had hoped to hear - would have been
>interested to know how well the dust removal system worked and how much
>longer it took. We have an old Monolta which does a multiple scan dust
>removal thang. It works reasonably well but takes forever to do one scan.
If you've got a bulk feeder, it doesn't matter how long a scan takes.
Just stick 50 slides in there and go off and do something else.
Dudley Simons - 30 Jun 2009 22:43 GMT
>> Well thats pretty much what I had hoped to hear - would have been
>> interested to know how well the dust removal system worked and how much
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> If you've got a bulk feeder, it doesn't matter how long a scan takes.
> Just stick 50 slides in there and go off and do something else.
Hi Peter
exactly, I'd be happy to hook the scanner upto a spare pc and just leave
it to chunter away to itself. The scan times would be particularily
long as I need to get some fairly hefty files from the slides.
I am hoping that the dust removal would give good results and not just
look like its been done with photoshop dust and scratches filter applied
to a whole image. Some of the slides are not entirely dissimilar to a
shag pile carpet and from previous experience I know that even once they
have been given a quick blow there will be a fair bit of cack that is
well and truly stuck on or embedded in the emulsion.
What I really want is to be able to get a straight scan and a 'repaired'
scan. I really don't like the idea of not having a straight version of
the scan. Do you know if it looks as though this is possible in the
software? I guess this is really a question for a techie at Nikon - if
they still have any :o(
regards
dudley