Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

ScanMate drum scanner DIY thread: maintenance, troubleshooting, mods
Old 12-28-2013   #1
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
ScanMate drum scanner DIY thread: maintenance, troubleshooting, mods

Here it is!

A thread dedicated to this fascinating (true PMT) drum scanner.

Let's share knowledge; tips, advices, mods, whatever!

Fernando
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #2
Ed Bray
Registered User
 
Ed Bray is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 80
What a great idea

I must admit that buying a Drum Scanner is just the first part of a long journey. The learning curve is very steep and there is so little information on the internet due to the age of both the scanners and the scanning software they use that as much information and experiences that can be passed between interested parties will hopefully give a resource that can be accessed by all for many years to come.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank all those who have given me help and encouragement during the few months I have had my Drum Scanner.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #3
MarinB
Registered User
 
MarinB is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 49
Fernando, great idea for a thread.
Ed, you're welcome. Wish I could get my hands on a 11000 for about what you paid for yours.

Fortunately, no need for me to troubleshoot my 3000 - yet. The only "surgery" it was put through in over a year of daily use was the replacement of a couple of bulbs. Done in a pinch. Did, however, perform several long drum polishing sessions with Novus 3-part kits, and it's worth the time. Since the drum is non-removable, you really need to be careful with it. But the detail it gives at "only" 3000 dpi... In fact, the shadow detail I get from underexposed HP5/Fuji Presto/Fomapan 400/TMX400 looks better on my two Eizo (PVA and S-IPS) monitors than a lot of BW scans I've seen from 11000. Is this the Achilles heal of 11000 - whatever the age/board version?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #4
Jonathan
Registered User
 
Jonathan is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 82
Great idea!
Have been looking at purchasing a Scanmate from a neighbour, but don't want to end up with a boat anchor.
This could be exactly what I need.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #5
tsiklonaut
Registered User
 
tsiklonaut's Avatar
 
tsiklonaut is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Estonia
Posts: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarinB View Post
Fortunately, no need for me to troubleshoot my 3000 - yet. The only "surgery" it was put through in over a year of daily use was the replacement of a couple of bulbs. Done in a pinch. Did, however, perform several long drum polishing sessions with Novus 3-part kits, and it's worth the time. Since the drum is non-removable, you really need to be careful with it. But the detail it gives at "only" 3000 dpi... In fact, the shadow detail I get from underexposed HP5/Fuji Presto/Fomapan 400/TMX400 looks better on my two Eizo (PVA and S-IPS) monitors than a lot of BW scans I've seen from 11000. Is this the Achilles heal of 11000 - whatever the age/board version?
Hi Marin,

Shadow detail in B&W means highlight (more transparent parts-) scanning from a negative. Highlights are vice versa - less transparent parts of film during scanning. If you see good shadows in your scan then it's good highlight scanning of your negatives. Scanning an underexposed negative B&W film means like scanning an overexposed positive, or a whole lot of highlight scanning since scanning is always in positive-mode by hardware, inversion from negative to positive is always done through software.

I have both 3000 and 11000, what I can tell is that SM11K has better shadow detail (I have the newer version 14bit AD control board with ABC-Scan modification to remove stripes in shadows - that's the true Acheilles heel on it IMO and I removed it) hence I think it renders better highlights on negative scans (or better shadows on positives). On negative-shadows (=highlights on actual film strip) I don't do much difference between the two scanners, I think they're more or less on par. SM11K has overall a bit smoother tonal transition and "smoother" looks (probably because of its 14bit A/D conversion).

I find 3000 is better for faster scanning and actually easier to use in some sense if you do mostly dry-mount work. IMO it has excellent balance between aperture (detail vs noise) and speed. 3000 ppi is sufficent on most cases for anything bigger than 35mm IMHO. In some cases I actually prefer the "character" of slightly rougher-looking scans the 3000 makes vs 11000. I'm still interested to know what are the approximate automatic aperture the 3000 model uses on maximum res, I'm guessing something around 10 micrometers or thereabouts.

On SM11K b&w scans - maybe you've looked too much on my scans - that's all to blame to my personal PP and taste since I love contrasty B&W rather than those over-brushed & -processed "HDR-like" B&Ws that're trendy in digital B&W photography? Remember I'm from the wet-darkroom school of limited DR, so for me the contrast means everything in B&W photography . 'Less is more' logic. For me there MUST be a completely dark part on a good b&w image - complete darkness is where human mind starts to dream and get the mind going on the picture: "what's there". I find most iconic B&W images I like have this completely dark area somewhere. Personally I'm tired of those HDR-like pushed-out shadow images where overwhelmingly and in a stressed-way every last detail must be visible. It's just a personal taste, hence I'm not a good example for B&W scans in today's photographic trends terms.

Margus
__________________
..:: 4nalog ::..
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #6
CNNY
Registered User
 
CNNY's Avatar
 
CNNY is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,374
These scanners pop up on ebay and elsewhere regularly, but it can be hard to find good information to compare the different models, or what would be a reasonable price.
Perhaps someone could give a brief overview of the different models, their key specs, plusses and minuses etc. Thanks.
__________________
instagram and some bits at
otopho on Shapeways
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-30-2013   #7
MarinB
Registered User
 
MarinB is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsiklonaut View Post
On SM11K b&w scans - maybe you've looked too much on my scans (...)
Margus, your BW scans actually look absolutely fine to my eyes, there are a couple of other people using 11000 for BW scanning and probably doing a bit too much post in PS. Guess it's too hard to judge from compressed jpegs. About slide scanning, I simply do the "alt" button trick in CQ 5 to get RAW 8-bit TIFFs and double the res and conv to 16-bit RGB. A whole heap of details in both shadows and highlights.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2013   #8
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
My 2 cents about the ScanMate 11000.

Foreword: I have other scanners; Dainippon-Screen DTS-1030 AI (an earlier, cheaper drum scanner), Nikon SuperCoolscan 8000ED, Epson V700, Minolta ScanElite 5400; this is to put my observations in context.

General.
Among all the ScanMate models, the 11000 was the latest and most advanced.
It can scan 8x10", has 16 bit/channel output, has a max output resolution of 11000 x 11000 ppi, can be driven from Mac OS 9, Mac OS X (I use 10.2.8), Windows XP 32 bit.
It is a SCSI scanner: it needs a Fast-SCSI2 interface. I use a 50 pin HD to 50 pin cable, with an Adaptec 2906 SCSI card (Mac). Works perfectly.

It has removable drums; each drum has a barcode ID so the software can remember the drum: for multi-user and multi-drum scan jobs and for focus calibration.
Actual resolving power is about 180 lp/mm x 125 lp/mm (dry mount, 11000 ppi). It declines steadily if you lower the scan resolution; that is, if you set 5500 ppi you get about 90 lp/mm x 60 lp/mm (I know, unfortunate).

Hardware limitations.
The scanner has a 64 KB line buffer. So a scanned line can only be smaller than 64 KB.
At 16 bits/channel RGB (48 bit total), this translates in about 10500 pixels per line. so at 11000 ppi, you can only scan about 24mm "vertically". After that, you get strange messed up scans (with no warnings!!! At least in ColorQuartet).
My solution is scanning in 10400 pixels-wide stripes, with a bit of overlapping, and then stitching in Photoshop.
Another limitation is 2 GB maximum scan job. CQ has a bug in that when scanning in 16 bits/channel, it reports the wrong size (half the real size) so you may end up with an error because you are beyond 2 GB but the software did not tell you.
Again, segmenting in more scans and stitching is my answer.

Focus.
The scanner has various means of focusing, unfortunately none is interactive (no immediate visual feedback).
You can calibrate focus with an appropriate target (included) and then use that focus value for all scans with that drum; you can type in a "focus offset value" applied to the calibrated value to compensate for different film thickness; you can rely on auto-focusing, specifying where to focus (about 1x1cm area).

Exposure.
The scanner has no real "exposure control" as in (some) CCD scanners.
But, you can "calibrate white" on the clear part of the film to better exploit the dynamic range.
For underexposed slides, I developed a little trick: I once shot a full roll of slides of a white surface with various exposure values (incident measure): from -3 EV to 3 EV at 0.5 EV steps.
So now I have a full set of darker and lighter "whites" to calibrate on, depending on the slide I have to scan. This proved very useful on occasion.
I did not try negatives yet. I think it will do just fine; but I don't know if it's possible to calibrate white on the negative mask (it may be useful to fully exploit the dynamic range, or it may be overkill. I did not try).

Software.
You have a choice of 2 scan softwares, for both Mac and Windows. Both are from ABC-Scan.

Color Trio: the simpler one. It used to be a free download, but now it's gone, it seems.
No Mac OS X version, only Mac OS 9 and Windows.
Slightly different between Mac and Windows.
On Mac, no 16 bit/channel output (on my version, at least) and no "raw" output.

Color Quartet: the most sophisticated. About $400 I think. Requires a USB dongle to operate. Dongles are different between Mac and Windows.
Supports Color Management; can accept an ICC input profile and can output for example in ProPhotoRGB.
Has various bugs. For example, raw output is only 8 bits/channel (even if you select 16 bits/channel).

Fernando
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2013   #9
Ed Bray
Registered User
 
Ed Bray is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 80
I am looking for a copy of Color Trio V2.0 that will work on Windows XP if anyone has a copy or knows of where I can download such please.

I have ordered a PCMCIA SCSI card for my old Windows XP Laptop I had forgotten about, I am also going to use it with the lead Jack has shown for communication with the scanner.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2013   #10
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
This should be ColorTrio v2.00 for Windows; but I didn't try it.
I don't know if there's a newer version.

https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/sh...ROkjJCqGnBFECA

Fernando
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2013   #11
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Or try here
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2013   #12
Ed Bray
Registered User
 
Ed Bray is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 80
Thank you both very much. I really appreciate it.

Very Best Wishes for the New Year to you all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2014   #13
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Piece of aluminum plate with apertures.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_5257.jpg (29.8 KB, 96 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-07-2014   #14
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Information regarding AD converter:

Quote:
The AD43057 was a custom ADC from the mid 1990s, and is now obsolete. The AD9243 is still in production, but there are no 16 bit replacements. I do not think there is a revision to replace this ADC without substantial re-design. This device uses a 5V supply, and supported a very wide input range. We have a new 16 bit ADC, the AD7961 which supports the wide input range, but the output data format is serial LVDS, not CMOS as were the old devices. I hope that helps.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-07-2014   #15
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Scanmate 11000 is recognized by CQ with Adaptec 1480 family PCMCIA-SCSI adapters.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2014   #16
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
3x Cree XM-L T6 (3600 lumens) attached to fiber optics. Interesting strips - LED is battery driven and blinks. This means PWM driver cannot be used only linear driver.

We need this LED:
http://www.ledengin.com/files/produc...LZC-00GW00.pdf

and proper driver that I'm working on.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg bez*tytu?u.jpg (75.0 KB, 64 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2014   #17
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
I always had this vertical stripes on negatives and pepper noise. To some extent this is aperture but here we have 2000 dpi scan so CQ shouldn't set min. aperture.


__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2014   #18
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Effect of an aperture. Problem with vertical strips - this is bulb and dust that forms on bulb pins. It has to be cleaned frequently because of temperature that causes oxidation.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg scan-14.jpg (63.6 KB, 84 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2014   #19
MarinB
Registered User
 
MarinB is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 49
Jacek, what resolution (dpi) was the right-hand image ("Large aperture") scanned at? This is SM11000, right?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2014   #20
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
It was 2000dpi and 6x9 negative, SM11000.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Scanmate Problems, Pictures too dark
Old 03-29-2014   #21
sdzsdz
Registered User
 
sdzsdz is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 10
Scanmate Problems, Pictures too dark

Hello from germany! As I was told in the Scanner Pictures-Thread, this is the right place for my question.

I found this thread while following a link posted by jazaga beneath one of my pictures at flickr.
Since one year Im scanning with a Scanmate 11000 and am quite happy with scanning negatives. But when scanning slides that have a huge tonal range and very dark areas I run into great problems. I tried CQ 5.2 (TIFF RAW, TIFF LAB and everything) and CT and ended up with CT superior to CQ regarding the shadow performance. I also determined that the shadow detail gets a bit better if I scan with higher resolution.
The Problem: Overall the scans are quite dark when coming out of the scanner. There is a lot of detail in the shadows but the tones are too narrow, if I spread it up in PS or Lightroom I end up with noise and extreme problems of light areas bleeding into dark ones, also the shadows are extremely red. I do of course white calibration, but not through the film but throug Mylar and fluid.
I cant complain about sharpness. I have a picture to show you the problem, perhaps somebody can help me. Please! Im trying and suffering for over 1 year now. I had also contact to ABC-Scan, but the technician there told me to tweak the curves in CQ but this is DEFENETLY not the solution.

This is the Picture Photographed with my ordinary D600 and a 85mm lens (not a macro)! This comes not even close to what my bare eye can see, the highlights in the slide are NOT blown out and the shadows show a lot of detail!
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3702/...aeee8963_c.jpg
auf Flickr
This is the picture coming out of the scanner with Colortrio 2 and a Gamma of 1,8, of corse I did white calibration, although not through the picture but through mylar and fluid. Scanned at 8000 dpi in 4 portions
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2904/...2a13c1db_c.jpg
auf Flickr
This is the scan after a lot of PS
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7121/...ce3fc2b8_c.jpg
auf Flickr
I think the sharpness is ok (no sharpening or highpass)
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2882/...d6733e03_c.jpg
auf Flickr
But the lights are severly bleeding into the dark areas
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7426/...13850781_c.jpg
auf Flickr
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7036/...bbd695f3cb.jpg
auf Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2014   #22
sdzsdz
Registered User
 
sdzsdz is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 10
Jzagaja told me in the other thread to use a new bulb. I did, the bulb Im using at the moment is 1 week old and has done only a few scans.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2014   #23
tsiklonaut
Registered User
 
tsiklonaut's Avatar
 
tsiklonaut is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Estonia
Posts: 893
Optics need to be cleaned (halos around the strong highlight contrasts), fiber input, front lens and maybe also dichrotic mirros (be extremely careful cleaning those not to mess up their order and positions) and optics probably need to be aligned (lighttube-to-sensorhead, bulb projecton mark-to-fibre-input), just in case I'd calibrate the aperture plate with the monitor program.

On more complicated matters: PMTs can be "tired" as well when you have a very narrow tonality over the slide scans. Was the scanner used by a pro lab before? Those scanners tend to get a lot of running and can result tired PMTs (optical fiber can dim in time too).
__________________
..:: 4nalog ::..
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-31-2014   #24
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
This is my scanner and underexposed Velvia:



Margus - I cleaned the lens but halos are always there e.g. film perforation. Do you have it too?
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-01-2014   #25
tsiklonaut
Registered User
 
tsiklonaut's Avatar
 
tsiklonaut is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Estonia
Posts: 893
Film backing is a different matter - I think this is a particular scanner's shadow rendering or probably AD converter's or signal-path own "character"? In natural design drum scanners with clean optics and signal paths usually are the very best scanner type in terms of film halo-reduction, since they scan a very tiny spot (single pixel actually) at the time. Most CCD scanners, including the high-ends tend to create more halos since they scan bigger patch of pixels throug their lens at the time and can't have such small apertures - they're very dependent on the lens optical- and coating quality to minimize halos as much they can. On the pic above you can see how V700 halos as hell compared to SM - i.e. the sky agains the roof, killing details in the halo transition zone, or even the brighter lamp glass against its dark frame. While the drum scanner draws out those contrasty lines and zones out very clearly in comparison.

Halo reduction wise only DSLR camera scanning beats it but in a very artificial way - the combination of interpolation of Bayer- or X-Trans CCD/CMOS pixel pattern combined with highly developed in-camera signal processing engine (noise reduction, microcontrast and acutance enhancement etc), basically cheating their way out around very contrasty details by artificially making them "look" sharp and clean (often rendering you the microcontrast and perceived sharpness you can't see if you inspect the film on the light table with a very good loupe), wherheas drum scanner is completely blind to interpoation, in fact it doesn't even understand it since it "sees" image as one pixel at the time.
__________________
..:: 4nalog ::..
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2014   #26
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
There is high possibility that stock DC motor 285787 by Maxon can be used instead of original custom made. Only thing that must be done is polarity change.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-04-2014   #27
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
I report odd looking strip on scans.

__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-11-2014   #28
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
Wow that's BAD!!!!!!!!

Any hypothesis?
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-12-2014   #29
MarinB
Registered User
 
MarinB is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 49
Could be a memory issue. Though I use a different Scanmate model (3000, as opposed to 11000), sometimes I get horizontal cyan stripes full width of the preview window, and sometimes shorter. Assuming you use ColorQuartet - quitting CQ/CQScan, starting it up again and doing a few previews in a row solves the cyan lines issue. I would also suggest leaving any rotation in CQ to zero, I'd occasionally get short red lines at random places in the scan if there was rotation applied.
My scanner is connected to a G4 Mac "Digital Audio" model that has had three completely new sets of RAM (3x PC133 512MB) installed in the last eight years. Maybe your PC is picky about RAM as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-19-2014   #30
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
No more issues.

I'm trying to scan 4x5" using 0.15mm PC foil. Both are too thick and results in air bubbles especially at the ends Kami AN spray - a lot of work with removing and dust sticks to it.

Maximum possible resolution in CQ for 4x5" negative ~2500dpi otherwise buffer error.
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-20-2014   #31
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
Yes, it is well known you can't pass about 10500 pixel for a line (64KB line buffer).

As for the foils, I use 0.1 or 0.05. Both work great, but with 0.05 you lose a bit less resolving power.

Fernando
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-23-2014   #32
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Brand new DC motor has arrived.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_5569.jpg (18.6 KB, 37 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-18-2014   #33
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Scanmate in action.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByP...it?usp=sharing
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-19-2014   #34
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzagaja View Post
Brand new DC motor has arrived.
So you purchased an original Maxon motor in the end?
Not the cheaper replacement?

Could you share some more details? I'm thinking about purchasing a spare motor for backup (better safe than sorry).
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-19-2014   #35
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Price is almost the same - 15 EUR difference so I've ordered 143202 (original). Haven't installed yet.

How sharp can be black marker on the drum at 8000 dpi? This is what I'm getting after drum alignment at both ends, 2x2mm crop:

__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-19-2014   #36
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Differences between CQ and CT:

- CT sets drum white to 255 255 255 (brighter image)
- CT manages selected crop better (no shifts)
- CT has problem with register error (wavy edges)
- Assign e.g. Adobe RGB to CT scan for right colour tone and saturation

__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-30-2014   #37
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
This is old and new motor. Did you get part B as in old motor? How did you remove part A?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image.jpg (20.7 KB, 42 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-31-2014   #38
Fernando2
Registered User
 
Fernando2's Avatar
 
Fernando2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 48
Posts: 260
Hi!
Did not get part B with the new motor.
And I don't remember how we removed part A; will ask my friend (who actually did the job) if he remembers (it's been more than 1 year ago).
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2014   #39
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
Scanmate 5000 does not have noise in shadows however I don't know mainboard changes.

__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2014   #40
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 292
LED light seems usable but flux is much weaker (Cree CXA without condenser lens) resulting unsuccesful calibration and typical green cast. Below example is with normalised white point and Cree is rated with CRI 90 (PSU 32V, 700mA). Interestingly Cree scan is sharper and pickups Newton ring

__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  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 07:37.


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.