Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: scanner question

Subject: [OM] Re: scanner question
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 19:01:22 -0800
C.H.Ling wrote:

>It is 4000ED not FS-4000 
>
Oops! Late night, too many similar numbers.

>but I believe the flare problem exist on many scanner but just not many people 
>notice about that.
>
Could be. You are more observant than most. I haven't noticed any 
problem on either of the Canons, and I look pretty closely at some images.

>>The FARE hardware dust/scratch removal on the FS4000 seems fully
>>comparable to ICE, but operates much faster.
>>
>All I heard is FS4000 is extremely slow even without FARE. The ICE in Nikon 
>is very fast actually.
>
I read a lot of similar info. Clearly, it is very slow using USB 1.1 on 
some systems. Some posts say changing to SCSI made a huge difference, 
others said it didn't change much. I've never even tried it with USB. 
With Vuescan, a lot of time can be taken up after the actual scan 
writing TIFF and/or JPEG files, especially with compression. RAW files 
are written as the physical scan proceeds, to there is no delay from 
frame to frame. That's why I scan to RAW first and get the physical part 
out of the way quickly. I then later 'scan' from RAW to TIFF and/or 
JPEG, which runs happliy in background while I do other things. In batch 
mode, set up so no preview scans are done, it doesn't seem all that 
slow, but I will time it next time I scan a roll.

FARE noise processing literally takes a second or two for a full 
resolution image, essentially adding no time to image processing.



==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz