vuescan 7.6.56 and Minolta5400 scanning times
Ralf Hartings
I downloaded and installed the newest Vuescan version (7.6.56) today
with improved support for the Minolta Scan Elite 5400.
I noticed that scanning times have increased enormously.
With the .54 version one batch scan at 2700 dpi incl the IR channel took
less than 3 minites per frame. It now takes 7 minutes (!) with the same
settings, Which is much longer than with the original Minolta software.
Has anybody similar experiences?
Ralf Hartings
Sweden
Ed Hamrick
> With the .54 version one batch scan at 2700 dpi incl the IR channel took
> less than 3 minites per frame. It now takes 7 minutes (!) with the same
> settings, Which is much longer than with the original Minolta software.
Try setting "Input|Lock exposure" and then reducing "Input|RGB exposure".
I suspect VueScan is using longer CCD exposure times than the
Minolta software. This produces better images, but takes longer.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Ralf Hartings
Ed,
I used the same settings for both runs (version .54 and .56).At least
that is what I remember, as I always use my saved vuescan.ini "batch"
settings. Both were run with Input|Lock exposure on and RGB exposure 1
and IR exposure at 2,15.
To me it looks as if something has changed between those two versions,
which elongates the scanning times that much. Unfortunately, I don't
have the .54 version left, so I can not reproduce it.
Ralf
Ed Hamrick
> To me it looks as if something has changed between those two versions,
Yes, VueScan 7.6.56 now uses the grain diffuser when scanning
with infrared. Previous versions didn't. This increases the
scan time.
I could make the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 scan without the grain
diffuser, but then you'd get stripes in the image.
I could limit the CCD exposure time, but this would reduce
the image quality.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Ralf Hartings
> "Ralf Hartings" <ralf.h...@telia.com> wrote:
>
>>To me it looks as if something has changed between those two versions,
>
>
> Yes, VueScan 7.6.56 now uses the grain diffuser when scanning
> with infrared. Previous versions didn't. This increases the
> scan time.
>
In the Filter tab, you can choose IR cleaning and Grain reduction
independent of each other. Do you mean that in reality the Grain
reduction is always on when the IR cleaning is chosen, independent of
the Grain reduction setting in the Filter tab?
If I do a batch scan, would the scanning time be shorter if I do not
activate IR cleaning? I assume that the IR channel is included (when
chosen) in the batch file anyhow, independent on the IR cleaning and
Grain reduction settings? Are these functions available afterwards, when
reading the batchfile from disk?
I am not sure if I really understand how I should use the vuescan
settings to fully utilise the scanners facilities, but at the same time
reducing the batch scanning times as much as possible.
> I could make the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 scan without the grain
> diffuser, but then you'd get stripes in the image.
>
I scanned two rolls of film with the .54 version without any stripes.
regards,
Ralf Hartings
Ed Hamrick
> In the Filter tab, you can choose IR cleaning and Grain reduction
> independent of each other. Do you mean that in reality the Grain
> reduction is always on when the IR cleaning is chosen, independent of
> the Grain reduction setting in the Filter tab?
The root of the problem is that Minolta describes the diffuser
as a "grain dissolver" (or something like that). This is one of
the side effects of it, but is not it's main purpose.
This is some translucent material in the light path that causes
the light source to be diffuse. This evens out the lighting in
the infrared channel (and evens out the RGB light to a lesser
degree).
The problem with the Scan Elite II and Scan Elite 5400 is that
the infrared light is very non-uniform (it has peaks and valleys),
is hard to use for dust removal and physically impossible to
completely compensate for with calibration data.
The diffuser in the Scan Elite 5400 solves this problem, but makes
the scan times longer. The grain reduction is just a side effect
of using a diffuse light source instead of a collimated light source.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Ralf Hartings
Thanks Ed,
That explained a lot!
One last question regarding the optimal settings for batch scanning with
the Elite5400. Is it correct that I can still use the IR cleaning
afterwards (using scan from disk), when I do a batch scan using these
settings:
- Input|Bits per pixel ="64 RGBI" and
- Output|raw file "yes" and
- Output|raw file type = "auto" or "64RGBI"
- Not using the IR cleaning and Grain diffusor in the Filter tab, does
shorten the batch time (less calculation time). The only result is that
they are not used when showing the picture in the vuescan window.The
information is still in the batch file stored on the disk.
Comments?
regards
Ralf Hartings
Ed Hamrick
> One last question regarding the optimal settings for batch scanning with
> the Elite5400. Is it correct that I can still use the IR cleaning
> afterwards (using scan from disk), when I do a batch scan using these
> settings:
> - Input|Bits per pixel ="64 RGBI" and
> - Output|raw file "yes" and
> - Output|raw file type = "auto" or "64RGBI"
All you need is "Output|Raw file" to be set - this scanner stores
the infrared data by default.
You can then do infrared cleaning later.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Bart van der Wolf
"Ed Hamrick" <use...@hamrick.com> wrote in message
news:bhlbbd$5ap$1...@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com...
> "Ralf Hartings" <ralf.h...@telia.com> wrote:
> > To me it looks as if something has changed between those two versions,
>
> Yes, VueScan 7.6.56 now uses the grain diffuser when scanning
> with infrared. Previous versions didn't. This increases the
> scan time.
This is the same approach Minolta took with their Scan Utility; ICE is only
possible with the "Grain Dissolver" enabled. The diffuser alone more than
doubles the exposure time, and adding ICE more than doubles that again.
> I could make the Minolta Scan Elite 5400 scan without the grain
> diffuser, but then you'd get stripes in the image.
Are you sure? If that was happening in the .55 version, then I agree.
However I was under the impression that IR was not properly controlled by
the IR exposure time. The IR channel looked identical between an exposure
setting of 0.001 and 11.
A better option would probably be Diffuser only without the IR exposure
(even better is to let the user decide; None, Diffuser only, IR only,
Diffuser and IR). The diffuser alone already removes scratches and makes
small dust particles less visible. It also is an ideal companion for silver
based B&W film (where IR wouldn't work anyway). Previewing and scanning with
the Diffuser only (which might be enough) is also much faster.
> I could limit the CCD exposure time, but this would reduce
> the image quality.
No, let's keep quality high. The user can then compromise his own quality by
locking and reducing exposure time manually.
Bart
Bart van der Wolf
"Ralf Hartings" <ralf.h...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:fFp%a.20147$mU6....@newsb.telia.net...
SNIP
> Has anybody similar experiences?
Yes. The IR cleaning (together with the Diffuser enabled) takes its toll.
If you know in advance that you won't need the IR cleaning, you can also
limit the (Input tab) Bits-per-pixel to 48 instead of 64 (or Auto), because
that will also speed up the preview a lot. In that case make sure you don't
select IR cleaning on the filter tab, because that re-enables the IR
scanning exposure.
Bart
Ralf Hartings
at 2700dpi):
- Input|bits/pixel: 24 bits scanning; time 1 minute; Vuescan .54/.56
- Input|bits/pixel: 64 (48 RGB splus IR channel); time 3 minutes;
Vuescan .54 (IR cleaning without diffuser)
- Input|bits/pixel: 64 (48 RGB splus IR channel); time 7 minutes;
Vuescan .56 (IR cleaning with diffuser)
A tremendous difference as you can see. The 3 minutes version is no
longer available though (version 7.6.54/55 only). So it's 1 or 7
minutes. You pay 6 minutes per frame extra for the IR cleaning. Could
this be reduced using the hardware of the 5400, or have we reached the
end? Could the diffuser be omitted in the IR cleaning? I know that the
infrared light is very non-uniform (it has peaks and valleys), and
is hard to use for dust removal and physically impossible to
completely compensate for with calibration data. But what can be
obtained (in terms of quality of IR cleaning) with the scanning times of
half of what we have now (7 minutes), meaning about 3 mintes?
Hurdles have been taken before....
best regards
Ralf
Bart van der Wolf
SNIP
> A summary of my scanning times, using the same settings (batch scanning
> at 2700dpi):
>
> - Input|bits/pixel: 24 bits scanning; time 1 minute; Vuescan .54/.56
> - Input|bits/pixel: 64 (48 RGB splus IR channel); time 3 minutes;
> Vuescan .54 (IR cleaning without diffuser)
> - Input|bits/pixel: 64 (48 RGB splus IR channel); time 7 minutes;
> Vuescan .56 (IR cleaning with diffuser)
Yes, the (addition of the) diffuser takes more than twice the exposure time.
> A tremendous difference as you can see. The 3 minutes version is no
> longer available though (version 7.6.54/55 only). So it's 1 or 7
> minutes. You pay 6 minutes per frame extra for the IR cleaning.
As Ed explained, the IR requires an additional RGB+IR exposure. The diffuser
also requires more exposure time.
> Could
> this be reduced using the hardware of the 5400, or have we reached the
> end? Could the diffuser be omitted in the IR cleaning?
Perhaps only a diffuser (no IR) exposure could cut the exposure time in half
and still provide "some" level of defect removal.
SNIP
> Hurdles have been taken before....
Hurdles are there to be taken... ;-)
Bart
Ed Hamrick
> This is the same approach Minolta took with their Scan Utility; ICE is
only
> possible with the "Grain Dissolver" enabled. The diffuser alone more than
> doubles the exposure time, and adding ICE more than doubles that again.
I've added the "Input|Grain dissolver" option to VueScan 7.6.57
to independently control when the grain dissolver is used. This
option is off by default.
VueScan's infrared cleaning now works with the dissolver either
turned on or off.
You can download VueScan 7.6.57 from:
http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
I'm travelling from August 18 through 25. If anyone finds anything
seriously wrong with 7.6.57, please let me know if the next few hours.
Regards,
Ed Hamrick
Bart van der Wolf
SNIP
> I've added the "Input|Grain dissolver" option to VueScan 7.6.57
> to independently control when the grain dissolver is used. This
> option is off by default.
Wonderful, also for silverbased Black&White negatives.
SNIP
> I'm travelling from August 18 through 25. If anyone finds anything
> seriously wrong with 7.6.57, please let me know if the next few hours.
The calibration for the SE5400 is not good yet, but that will probably have
to wait till after your travel.
Have a good trip.
Bart
Daniel Leroy
> to independently control when the grain dissolver is used. This
> option is off by default.
>
> VueScan's infrared cleaning now works with the dissolver either
> turned on or off.
>
> You can download VueScan 7.6.57 from:
>
> http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html
>
> I'm travelling from August 18 through 25. If anyone finds anything
> seriously wrong with 7.6.57, please let me know if the next few hours.
>
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick
I do have problems with b&w negs. The highlights get severely clipped
even though they are not blocked. i mean, a traditionnal enlarger
would go through them easily. I have some pictures where, even with
exposure set at 11, I get empty highlights.