I've got a Nikon 9000ED on the way, a few questions...
Old 05-08-2017   #1
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
I've got a Nikon 9000ED on the way, a few questions...

I've been using a Nikon 5000ED for about 10 years and have been very happy, but I've been shooting more 6x9 these days so I decided to finally pull the trigger on a used 9000ED, it should be here in a few days.

I scored one that luckily includes the FH-869GR rotating glass holder. This looks perfect for my medium format needs, but for 35mm can it handle regular 24x35 frames? The 35mm masks only appear to be for panoramic ratios. Is there any harm to using the pano masks and just cropping to the regular format?

Also, with my 5000ED I've stuck with the old Nikon software, keeping an ancient laptop solely for that purpose. It's kept me happy, but I was thinking maybe it's time to switch to VueScan so I can use my newer computer. Will the results be of equal quality? I tried VueScan once years ago but hated the interface...

Finally, I hear the 9000ED is less likely to over-emphasize grain as my 5000ED does. Has this been anyone's experience has used both models?

Thanks!
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2017   #2
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,300
Hi Andre,

I am sooo jealous! I too have been using a 5000ED for a while, and I love it. I have slacked off considerably with medium format because I use a microTek i800 for that, and ... well it's not as good as the Nikon scanner.

When I switched from Nikon's scanner software to Vuescan I hated it too. All the features seemed to be hidden, as if Hamrick wants you to stick with the defaults. Once you figure out a workflow though, it does a really good job.

I also know what you mean about the 5000 making grain super-evident. I mean, I like grian, so it's great and all, but c'mon! I found a work around by fine-tuning my scanning resolution. It turns out 4000dpi is not the ideal pitch to keep grain in it's place. I've come down to 3200ish, and everything looks better. It prints fine up to 20 inches.

And I have also noticed that 120 film shows grain a lot less than 35mm ... always.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #3
J enea
Registered User
 
J enea is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Los Altos, SF Bay Area
Posts: 90
I have a 9000, but only use it for MF film. I use vuescan and its far superior to the nikon software, at least thats how i feel. I found at my local library a great book called the vuescan bible. you can read the whole thing in a hour or so if you understand basic scanning. its a great tool. I copied the 2 page part on doing "raw" scanning and it was very helpful when i first started out using vuescan. dont need it now. there have been many updates to vuescan so some info is out of date, but it helps yo get the the right way much faster. Dont pay $60 for it, again i found it at my library.

https://www.amazon.com/VueScan-Bible-Everything-Perfect-Scanning/dp/1933952695/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1494372118&sr=8-1&keywords=vuescan+bible

john
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #4
Robert Lai
Registered User
 
Robert Lai is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,392
You need to get that book about Vuescan in order to make it work properly. I've had both the Coolscan 5000 and the 9000. I eventually sold off the 5000, but only when I was unemployed and needed the money. I still have the 9000.

You should be able to use the full 4000 pixels/inch resolution without super evident grain. If that's the case you probably have some "sharpening" setting in the Nikon scan.

Although I still do have a laptop running Windows XP, and another one running Windows 7, I use Vuescan now. What I've done is get reference slides, and profiled the scanner. Now I scan to RAW, and attach the color profile of the film (e.g. Fuji Provia 100F) to the scan, to instantly give me a match to the colors on the slide. This gives me a starting point for further editing. Vuescan also lets you do this in a batch mode, so you can do dozens of RAW scans at a time.

The 9000 have a maximum scan length of 9cm. Thus 6 x 9 is the largest format that you can scan. It's good for me, as I have a Kodak Medalist II, and a Voigtlander RF in this format. If you want super panoramics e.g. 6 x 12 or 6 x 17, then you're going to have to scan each half, and stitch together. You have to be aware that depending on the color depth and so on, a 6x9 frame will give you a 120MB TIFF file. It's for this reason that I don't want to keep torturing myself with those old antique Windows XP computers with 1GB of Memory.

The 35mm "panoramic" film holders will indeed allow you to scan a full XPAN frame. However, you can stick TWO strips of film with 5 (maybe 6, I can't remember all the details now) frames each. Once you do an initial scan, it will identify all of the different frames for you. You can crop each frame individually, and designate some frames not to be scanned. Then once you hit "SCAN", it will automatically scan the 10 or so frames in the film holder for you. So, go do something else for 20 minutes or so, and at the end you'll have 10 image files added to your hard drive.

I don't have a half frame camera, but I don't see why you couldn't scan 20 individual frames at a time from a half frame camera film strip.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #5
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
I have the 8000ED with the FH-869-GR carrier. I scan 35mm using the pano masks and it works perfect. Make sure you use the appropriate mask for any film you scan on that carrier. If you put film in it without the plastic mask, you'll get newton's rings.

Vuescan works well. I have written Vuescan tutorials using the 8000; the settings I give should work fine for the 9000 as well.

BW Negative Scanning Tutorial

Color Slide Scanning Tutorial
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #6
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
Thanks everyone, some good info here.

Quick question for the Vuescan crowd. With NikonScan, I got the best results for color by scanning raw yielding .NEF files, and then doing my toning and outputting to AdobeRGB in Adobe Camera Raw. The ICE dust removal was preserved in the .NEF file which was handy. It looks like if I save to DNG with VueScan, no dust removal is in the file. I have the IR channel saved, but I'd still have to output to TIFF or JPEG from VueScan to utilize it after the scan. Am I understanding that right? Not really a big deal, I'm sure I'd be happy just saving as 16bit TIFF from VueScan.
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #7
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,872
I have the 9000 with a full complement of the standard carriers as well as the ANR glass carrier. The 35mm strip carrier handles two standard format 6 frame strips at a time .. very efficient.

I use VueScan but do get the book. I've been using it so long I forget the details of my setups because I have them all saved and just load the one I need and use it.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #8
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Quick question for the Vuescan crowd. With NikonScan, I got the best results for color by scanning raw yielding .NEF files, and then doing my toning and outputting to AdobeRGB in Adobe Camera Raw. The ICE dust removal was preserved in the .NEF file which was handy. It looks like if I save to DNG with VueScan, no dust removal is in the file. I have the IR channel saved, but I'd still have to output to TIFF or JPEG from VueScan to utilize it after the scan. Am I understanding that right? Not really a big deal, I'm sure I'd be happy just saving as 16bit TIFF from VueScan.
I never use a DNG container since I don't see any benefit to it, so I don't know what it's limitation actually are... But, what exactly are you trying to do?

a) Output uncorrected raw file with separate IR channel layer?
b) Output ICE corrected raw file?

Vuescan can do both. Although I don't think you can have a) with DNG container.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #9
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
I never use a DNG container since I don't see any benefit to it, so I don't know what it's limitation actually are... But, what exactly are you trying to do?

a) Output uncorrected raw file with separate IR channel layer?
b) Output ICE corrected raw file?

Vuescan can do both. Although I don't think you can have a) with DNG container.

I think his purpose in outputting RAW files is that, for color photos, you can adjust white balance in Lightroom or Photoshop. Though Vuescan has a few light-sources to choose from in the COLOR tab, its not as precise as what you can do with a real image editor like LR or PS.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #10
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
Correct, I found I got better results working off of a .NEF file with NikonScan. It was handy that the .NEF raw file had the ICE dust removal applied to it. Less dust removal for me to do in post.

Curious if I can do the same with VueScan.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
I think his purpose in outputting RAW files is that, for color photos, you can adjust white balance in Lightroom or Photoshop. Though Vuescan has a few light-sources to choose from in the COLOR tab, its not as precise as what you can do with a real image editor like LR or PS.
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-09-2017   #11
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Correct, I found I got better results working off of a .NEF file with NikonScan. It was handy that the .NEF raw file had the ICE dust removal applied to it. Less dust removal for me to do in post.

Curious if I can do the same with VueScan.

Good question. I haven't tried it. I rarely scan color film anymore, I'm all digital in my color work. I'll have to try it and see.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #12
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
I think his purpose in outputting RAW files is that, for color photos, you can adjust white balance in Lightroom or Photoshop. Though Vuescan has a few light-sources to choose from in the COLOR tab, its not as precise as what you can do with a real image editor like LR or PS.
I never wondered about his motive behind outputting to RAW. I was asking about the usage of a DNG container (vs. TIF format). DNG might or might not have (I don't know as I never tried) the ability to save IR channel data...

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Correct, I found I got better results working off of a .NEF file with NikonScan. It was handy that the .NEF raw file had the ICE dust removal applied to it. Less dust removal for me to do in post.

Curious if I can do the same with VueScan.
... but since you are trying to output "raw" data with IR correction already applied this is moot. It is possible to have that in Vuescan and it's very easy.

In the output tab set the 'Raw output with' option to 'Save'. Check that in the Input tab you are scanning with 64bits per pixel and that you have 'Infrared clean' enabled in the 'Filter' tab.

With that Vuescan will scan the film, apply IR correction to raw and then save that to your desired output format/container.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #13
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
I never wondered about his motive behind outputting to RAW. I was asking about the usage of a DNG container (vs. TIF format). DNG might or might not have (I don't know as I never tried) the ability to save IR channel data...



... but since you are trying to output "raw" data with IR correction already applied this is moot. It is possible to have that in Vuescan and it's very easy.

In the output tab set the 'Raw output with' option to 'Save'. Check that in the Input tab you are scanning with 64bits per pixel and that you have 'Infrared clean' enabled in the 'Filter' tab.

With that Vuescan will scan the film, apply IR correction to raw and then save that to your desired output format/container.
I think that's what I'm hoping for, I'll have to try it out. Thanks!

Sounds like VueScan will be worth the price.
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #14
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
I never wondered about his motive behind outputting to RAW. I was asking about the usage of a DNG container (vs. TIF format). DNG might or might not have (I don't know as I never tried) the ability to save IR channel data...



... but since you are trying to output "raw" data with IR correction already applied this is moot. It is possible to have that in Vuescan and it's very easy.

In the output tab set the 'Raw output with' option to 'Save'. Check that in the Input tab you are scanning with 64bits per pixel and that you have 'Infrared clean' enabled in the 'Filter' tab.

With that Vuescan will scan the film, apply IR correction to raw and then save that to your desired output format/container.

Interesting, I didn't know how to save a raw file with the IR clean info. If you open the file in another editor, like Lightroom, does the image appear with the dust removed, or do you have to open the RAW in Vuescan and resave as a TIFF or JPEG?
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #15
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Interesting, I didn't know how to save a raw file with the IR clean info. If you open the file in another editor, like Lightroom, does the image appear with the dust removed, or do you have to open the RAW in Vuescan and resave as a TIFF or JPEG?
The file is then cleaned of dust/scratches*. Doesn't matter where you open it.


* meaning that Vuescan had a go at it (results are far from perfect**)
** if you have Photoshop and you save IR channel within the raw tiff file you can use it to clean the file much much better than any ICE implementation in any scanning software
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #16
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
The file is then cleaned of dust/scratches*. Doesn't matter where you open it.


* meaning that Vuescan had a go at it (results are far from perfect**)
** if you have Photoshop and you save IR channel within the raw tiff file you can use it to clean the file much much better than any ICE implementation in any scanning software
Now I'm really curious, how do you utilize the saved IR channel in Photoshop?
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #17
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Now I'm really curious, how do you utilize the saved IR channel in Photoshop?
Yeah, me too!
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-10-2017   #18
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Now I'm really curious, how do you utilize the saved IR channel in Photoshop?
I use the IR channel as a selection mask and then run content-aware fill on the selection.

I'm at work now and can do a short step-by-step guide with correct descriptions of PS functions/tools used later, but basically it goes like this:

- select IR (alpha) channel and do a threshold on it so you get rid of greys and only have blacks where the defects are and white everywhere else
- do a color selection on this so you have selected all the black areas on IR layer; expand the selections a few pixels so the content-aware fill tool will have a bit of surrounding area to work with
- deselect IR channel and select normal rgb channels
- optionally create new layer so the changes will be non-destructible
- run content-aware fill on the duplicated layer


I'm sure somebody can come up with even better workflow, my PS skill are VERY basic.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-23-2017   #19
marekvesely
Registered User
 
marekvesely's Avatar
 
marekvesely is offline
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
- select IR (alpha) channel and do a threshold on it so you get rid of greys and only have blacks where the defects are and white everywhere else
- do a color selection on this so you have selected all the black areas on IR layer; expand the selections a few pixels so the content-aware fill tool will have a bit of surrounding area to work with
- deselect IR channel and select normal rgb channels
- optionally create new layer so the changes will be non-destructible
- run content-aware fill on the duplicated layer
This is super-interesting info! I wasn't able to use the IR channel within PS as of now. Could you explain how exactly do you perform the threshold correction (the 1st step)? Also how do you import the RAW tiff from Vuescan into Photoshop (without deleting the alpha channel)? Do you go through CameraRAW without a problem? Thank you!
__________________
Marek Vesely [ DP / Camera Operator ]
[email protected] / Web / Instagram

---------------------------------------------------------------
[6x12] Fotoman 612 mk2 - Fujinon 75mm f/5.6 SWD
[6x9] Fujifilm GW690III - Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 EBC
---------------------------------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2017   #20
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)l
Posts: 1,019
I have the Vuescan Bible too and while it is interesting I didn't find that it offered much more info than what's on the internet. For instance, there is this guide which is a good starting point.

I used Nikon Scan a long time ago and also have an installation on a Snow Leopard volume but I virtually never use it. What I like about Vuescan is that it is so easy to create profiles. So once set up as you want it, it's a matter of loading the profile for the film you use and all settings are there.

I think my 9000 gives less pronounced grain than my V ED but I have not really done a comparison. Grain is also affected by many other things, like how old the film stock is and how well exposed the frame is. Another tip for reducing the impression of grain is to scan at a very high DPI and down-size. Some say using fine mode or multi-passes helps but I haven't seen that in practice. And I wet mount my 120 films too so that reduces grain some too.

The suggestion of using the IR channel as a mask and then a content-aware fill is very creative. I'll have to try it out. So far I am just using the save raw output with feature to get rid of dust. It works well enough for me.

I don't used DNG but save as TIFF, "linear" ones for C41 which I then "develop" in ColorPerfect, and non-linear ones for slides and b&w film. I don't do colour corrections in Vuescan at all. Rather I used Adobe Camera Raw for all colour and edits (though I do spot the TIFFs in Photoshop and save a "clean original" before opening in ACR).

br
Philip
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2017   #21
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by marekvesely View Post
This is super-interesting info! I wasn't able to use the IR channel within PS as of now. Could you explain how exactly do you perform the threshold correction (the 1st step)? Also how do you import the RAW tiff from Vuescan into Photoshop (without deleting the alpha channel)? Do you go through CameraRAW without a problem? Thank you!
I don't use CameraRaw (what is it?). I just open raw vuescan tiff file in PS.

I'm not at home so this is from memory:

- when you have opened the raw tiff in PS, select alpha channel
- go to 'Image - Adjustment - Threshold'
- move the slider so that you only see emulsion defects (it helps if you first set the canvas magnification high enough that you can see emulsion defects and observe how the threshold is working on your IR channel)
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2017   #22
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipus View Post
The suggestion of using the IR channel as a mask and then a content-aware fill is very creative. I'll have to try it out. So far I am just using the save raw output with feature to get rid of dust. It works well enough for me.
Just recently I revisited the Vuescan's "ICE" (when hearing that people actually use it) and found out that the most aggressive filtering option worked best (contrary to the widely adopted suggestion that the lightest filtering works best). Maybe Vuescan changed something (it's been years since I last used it's IR cleanup) or this was just down to a particular type of film that worked best with the heaviest filtering?
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2017   #23
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)l
Posts: 1,019
I'm afraid I can't help. I have always used digital ICE, and at the lowest setting, and find that it is sufficient for my purposes. I don't see that it would "soften" the image much if anything. In any event, I always process my images with sharpening added at various stages.


Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
Just recently I revisited the Vuescan's "ICE" (when hearing that people actually use it) and found out that the most aggressive filtering option worked best (contrary to the widely adopted suggestion that the lightest filtering works best). Maybe Vuescan changed something (it's been years since I last used it's IR cleanup) or this was just down to a particular type of film that worked best with the heaviest filtering?
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2017   #24
analogangler
Registered User
 
analogangler is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 29
I use VueScan with the 9000 ED and find the combination quite good, once you figure out where everything you need is in VueScan. I found the VueScan Bible helped a lot in explaining where things are and some of the logic behind how the program works. Once you do find everything you can conveniently save it as a preset which makes things easier later.

Note that while VueScan may not be the most polished piece of code, it receives frequent updates and so the VueScan Bible may not match the current user experience in all cases. Also note that you get these updates as part of your pro-level purchase. It's nice to see that the software is being actively maintained and even better that you don't have to shell out every time a new version comes along.

I've used the VueScan dust reduction on light and not noticed any issues...minimizes the dust though if you look hard you can see where it was...but may try higher levels based on the comments above. Always best to get it off beforehand...to this end I use anti-static gloves, a blower, and a hard light to inspect prior to insertion.

I'd also note that one feature I've found invaluable for slides is the multiple-exposure mode, which will run 2 passes, one normal and one with increased exposure for the shadows. I find this really helps pick out the subtle details in the dense areas of positives.

Just my $0.02 - happy scanning!
__________________
- Analog Angler
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-25-2017   #25
pomozwi
Registered User
 
pomozwi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 14
I have been using a 5000 ED and Nikon Scan 4.03 for about 8 years now starting with Win XP and then Win7 64 Pro and currently Win 10 64 Pro.

Currently using a Dell notebook, Win 10 64 Pro. Some say that Nikon Scan 4 will not work on Windows machines beyond XP. Not True. I have an alternate set of driver files but I have not needed them. I only installed Scan 4 about 2 weeks ago and it's working fine.

I also have Vuescan but haven't taken the time to get to grips with it yet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2017   #26
andrewnelles
Registered User
 
andrewnelles is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 68
Well I finally got my 9000ED. I ordered from a seller in Greece and unfortunately the first 9000ED got crushed and destroyed in shipping. Luckily he had a second one to send, and it just arrived tonight.

I did a quick test to confirm it's functions using the FH-869GR holder. The scans looks great, but I did get some Newton Rings on the scan. I was scanning 6x9 using the appropriate mask. The film did have some curve to it. A link to the photo is below, you can see some rings in the hair and just to the right of the face. Any tips on avoiding those in the future?

http://andrewnellesphoto.com/hosted/9000ed.jpg
__________________
Andrew A. Nelles
www.andrewnelles.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2017   #27
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewnelles View Post
Well I finally got my 9000ED. I ordered from a seller in Greece and unfortunately the first 9000ED got crushed and destroyed in shipping. Luckily he had a second one to send, and it just arrived tonight.

I did a quick test to confirm it's functions using the FH-869GR holder. The scans looks great, but I did get some Newton Rings on the scan. I was scanning 6x9 using the appropriate mask. The film did have some curve to it. A link to the photo is below, you can see some rings in the hair and just to the right of the face. Any tips on avoiding those in the future?

http://andrewnellesphoto.com/hosted/9000ed.jpg

If the film touches the bottom glass, you'll get the newton's rings. If the film you have has a curve that curves downward, causing it to touch the bottom glass, scan the film upside down then flip it in photoshop. That will make the film curve up totouch the top glass, which is textured to prevent newton's rings.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2017   #28
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 870
For those mentioning that Nikon Scan 4 won't work past Windows XP - you're right, with stock Nikon drivers. I modified said drivers to work with Windows 7 for a friend who bought an LS-9000.

If someone is wanting to upgrade to Win7 and use Nikon Scan (which I preferred over VueScan myself) I might be willing to mail you some drivers. A donation of a roll of film might be appreciated . I'll have to go through my notes and files to find it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2017   #29
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
For those mentioning that Nikon Scan 4 won't work past Windows XP - you're right, with stock Nikon drivers. I modified said drivers to work with Windows 7 for a friend who bought an LS-9000.

If someone is wanting to upgrade to Win7 and use Nikon Scan (which I preferred over VueScan myself) I might be willing to mail you some drivers. A donation of a roll of film might be appreciated . I'll have to go through my notes and files to find it.
Ummm, I'm using Nikon Scan 4 on Windows 7 with stock Nikon drivers

More specifically, I'm using Nikon Scan 4.0.3, which was made for Windows Vista, on a Windows 7 Professional 32 bit system.

The only function that doesn't work like it used to on Windows XP is ICE. Going straight to scanning with ICE turned on results in a scanning error. There is a workaround though > instead of going straight to scanning with ICE turned on, first Preview each scan with ICE turned on and then you can scan each scan with ICE turned on. Batch scanning works for both Preview and Scan operations and the total scan time works out to be around what it used to take to scan a full roll on XP with ICE turned on, albeit in two steps instead of one.

I know there's a fairly simple way to hack the drivers so they work on Windows 7 64 bit, but I haven't needed to tackle that yet. Maybe one day.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2017   #30
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 870
Ah, 32-bit. Perhaps it did not work for me stock because I have a 64-bit system. I never tried on a 32-bit Win7 install. So you are only using 4GB of RAM? Ouch.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2017   #31
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 4,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
Ah, 32-bit. Perhaps it did not work for me stock because I have a 64-bit system. I never tried on a 32-bit Win7 install. So you are only using 4GB of RAM? Ouch.
Yes. I needed a 32 bit operating system for other software. With my basic image editing needs, 4GB of RAM is sufficient.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2017   #32
pomozwi
Registered User
 
pomozwi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 14
Like jonmanjiro I'm using Nikon Scan 4.0.3, named ns403en_vista.exe which, from memory I downloaded from a Nikon website, (file is dated over 5 years ago).

This copy of NS installs and runs under Win 10 Pro 64 bit without additional drivers.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2017   #33
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 870
There must be something different with the architecture of Win10 64-bit. Good to know that works. I am running Win10 on my Surface Book but no longer have an 8000 or 9000 but have access to my friend's.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:44.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.