Bug report vuescan (version 7 and 8) with Nikon CS5000ED

Hi Ed!

I found an annoying bug in vuescan in combination with Nikon CS5000ED:
When I start with an empty .ini file and set the Scan Quality to Auto,
so that the dpi are computed to the print size (which is the default
4x6in), and then I scan an image, the preview is ok, but the scan is
stretched in the long dimension of the slide.

I checked this with windows xp and linux, and on both with
vuescan-7.6.84 and vuescan-8.0. Its always the same.

As soon as I select a dpi (like 1000, etc), scanning works without problems.

I haven't realized this till now because I always used a fixed resolution.

If you need a log file of a failed scan, please tell me.

Best wishes

Norbert

Norbert,

Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,
there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
other strange artifacts.
It looks as if it is a 2000ppi scan interpolated up in a nearest
neighbor
fashion. It is not really usable. I scan almost exclusively negatives.
Have you seen this issue?

Thanks

W


Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote in message news:<40a2982c$0$16036$3b214f66@tunews.univie.ac.at>...
> Hi Ed!
>
> I found an annoying bug in vuescan in combination with Nikon CS5000ED:
> When I start with an empty .ini file and set the Scan Quality to Auto,
> so that the dpi are computed to the print size (which is the default
> 4x6in), and then I scan an image, the preview is ok, but the scan is
> stretched in the long dimension of the slide.
>
> I checked this with windows xp and linux, and on both with
> vuescan-7.6.84 and vuescan-8.0. Its always the same.
>
> As soon as I select a dpi (like 1000, etc), scanning works without problems.
>
> I haven't realized this till now because I always used a fixed resolution.
>
> If you need a log file of a failed scan, please tell me.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Norbert

Hi Ed, hi WD!

WD wrote:
> Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
> 4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,

I have set up a small web page comparing 4000dpi vs 2000dpi scans of
VueScan and NikonScan, and 4000dpi NikonScan vs 4000dpi Vuescan.

> there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
> almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
> other strange artifacts.

You are right, it really looks like this. Strange.

Ed, can you comment on this, please!

The web page is:
http://www.logic.at/people/preining/scan/

Best wishes

Norbert

On Fri, 14 May 2004 08:28:20 +0200, Norbert Preining
<preining@logic.at> wrote:

>Hi Ed, hi WD!
>
>WD wrote:
>> Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
>> 4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,
>
>I have set up a small web page comparing 4000dpi vs 2000dpi scans of
>VueScan and NikonScan, and 4000dpi NikonScan vs 4000dpi Vuescan.
>
>> there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
>> almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
>> other strange artifacts.

Mine appear to be the same as the NikonScan 4000 dpi.
What size are the files?

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>You are right, it really looks like this. Strange.
>
>Ed, can you comment on this, please!
>
>The web page is:
>http://www.logic.at/people/preining/scan/
>
>Best wishes
>
>Norbert

Roger,

The files are the correct size for a 4000ppi scan. Specifically,
for an 8 bit 4000ppi scan, the files are about 60 MB TIFF format.

WD


Roger Halstead <Delete-Invallid.groups@tm.net> wrote in message news:<njaaa0tn5rilfg9do7gi0jp6bdjoi1l8fo@4ax.com>...
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 08:28:20 +0200, Norbert Preining
> <preining@logic.at> wrote:
>
> >Hi Ed, hi WD!
> >
> >WD wrote:
> >> Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
> >> 4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,
> >
> >I have set up a small web page comparing 4000dpi vs 2000dpi scans of
> >VueScan and NikonScan, and 4000dpi NikonScan vs 4000dpi Vuescan.
> >
> >> there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
> >> almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
> >> other strange artifacts.
>
> Mine appear to be the same as the NikonScan 4000 dpi.
> What size are the files?
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
> >
> >You are right, it really looks like this. Strange.
> >
> >Ed, can you comment on this, please!
> >
> >The web page is:
> >http://www.logic.at/people/preining/scan/
> >
> >Best wishes
> >
> >Norbert

Ed,

Any ideas on this issue at 4000ppi with the Nikon LS5000?
(see below especially Norberts web page).
I really want to use Vuescan, but this bug precludes me from doing that
since it does not seem possible to get true 4000ppi scans.
I am sure myself and others with the LS5000 would be willing to go the
extra mile to help you resolving this via private or test loads etc.
It would be in the best interests of your user community as well as yourself.

What do you think?

WD


Roger Halstead <Delete-Invallid.groups@tm.net> wrote in message news:<njaaa0tn5rilfg9do7gi0jp6bdjoi1l8fo@4ax.com>...
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 08:28:20 +0200, Norbert Preining
> <preining@logic.at> wrote:
>
> >Hi Ed, hi WD!
> >
> >WD wrote:
> >> Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
> >> 4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,
> >
> >I have set up a small web page comparing 4000dpi vs 2000dpi scans of
> >VueScan and NikonScan, and 4000dpi NikonScan vs 4000dpi Vuescan.
> >
> >> there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
> >> almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
> >> other strange artifacts.
>
> Mine appear to be the same as the NikonScan 4000 dpi.
> What size are the files?
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
> >
> >You are right, it really looks like this. Strange.
> >
> >Ed, can you comment on this, please!
> >
> >The web page is:
> >http://www.logic.at/people/preining/scan/
> >
> >Best wishes
> >
> >Norbert

"WD" <winhag@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Have you had problems at 4000ppi? I have a CS5000ED and found that at
> 4000ppi the scan does not seem to really be 4000ppi. Specifically,
> there are '4000ppi"s' worth of pixels, but if you zoom in, pixels
> almost look as if they are repeated. This results in jagged lines and
> other strange artifacts.

I've had a few people report this, and it's getting near the top
of my list of things to fix.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

Ed Hamrick wrote:
> I've had a few people report this, and it's getting near the top
> of my list of things to fix.

If you need help in testing, I am using linux, with self compiled kernel
2.6.6-mmX, on debian/sid. The scanner is on a separate usb2.0 extension
pci card.

I also have winxp available for crosstesting.

Best wishes

Norbert

Ed,

That would be fantastic. I am sick of playing games with Nikon Scan
to capture the full dynamic range of my negs. I too am willing to
help if possible. I am running WinXP Home with USB2 connection.

WD


Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote in message news:<40ab46a7$0$33210$3b214f66@tunews.univie.ac.at>...
> Ed Hamrick wrote:
> > I've had a few people report this, and it's getting near the top
> > of my list of things to fix.
>
> If you need help in testing, I am using linux, with self compiled kernel
> 2.6.6-mmX, on debian/sid. The scanner is on a separate usb2.0 extension
> pci card.
>
> I also have winxp available for crosstesting.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Norbert