Nikon Coolscan 4000 ED SA-30 Roll Film Adapter vs. SF-200 Slide Feeder
bradleyphillip
I'm looking very closely at the Nikon CoolScan400 ED for my unattended
batch scanning of 35mm film needs, and I have a question regarding
film flatness (corresponding to scan sharpness) for those of you who
have experience with this scanner.
Can anyone advise me as to which batch feeding solution provides
better film flatness? I have noticed that slides tend to bow in 2
dimensions when in slide holders, where as uncut film tends to bow in
one dimension; does this imply that the Roll Film Adapter will yield
sharper scans?
I shoot slide film exclusively, so either the SA-30 or the SF200 would
suit my needs.
Any information on your experiences is greatly appreciated.
bradley phillip
ThomasH
>
> Hi, all,
>
> I'm looking very closely at the Nikon CoolScan400 ED for my unattended
> batch scanning of 35mm film needs, and I have a question regarding
> film flatness (corresponding to scan sharpness) for those of you who
> have experience with this scanner.
>
> Can anyone advise me as to which batch feeding solution provides
> better film flatness? I have noticed that slides tend to bow in 2
> dimensions when in slide holders, where as uncut film tends to bow in
> one dimension; does this imply that the Roll Film Adapter will yield
> sharper scans?
>
> I shoot slide film exclusively, so either the SA-30 or the SF200 would
> suit my needs.
I have the both adapters and in my opinion nothing can beat an uncut roll
of film and the roll film adapter SA-30 for a reliable and convenient batch
scan.
I have not observed any problems with film flatness in the SA-30 or with the
autofocus in my LS-4000ED for that matter. I have some points of criticism
about the SA30 though.
Let me "cut and paste" the collected observations regarding batch scan
with the LS-4000ED, SF-200 and SA-30 from my archive...
SA-30 uses rubber rolls touching the film surface instead of just grabbing
the film perforation. Over the time these rolls collect some amount of dust
particles which rub the film and they are difficult to clean.
Furthermore, the film roll-out drum is available only for the rear side of
the scanner, so your problem will be the film handling on the front side!
The both SA21 and SA30 adapters have the nasty habit of ejecting the film
after a non specified and non adjustable period of time. Now imagine that
you leave home and forget the film in the scanner. The scanner will spill
it out and your good film would be lying around exposed to dust, maybe even
on the ground.
I found a home made solution to this: A $8 cookie jar with a sealing lid.
This is a regular transparent jar, which I purchased at Longs Drugs, at
least 8" in diameter and the kind with flatten sides. Now the film unrolls
nicely into the jar. I can even just close the lid and leave home with
the film protected from dust. Should you get yourself a similar jar, verify
carefully its smoothness inside!! This exposure to dust is a serious problem.
At 4000dpi a scan with ICE/GEM may take some 4-5min per frame, that is some
2:30 to 3:00 hours for the entire roll. You do not want your film to be fully
unprotected for such periods of time.
I have discovered that the SA30 can be used in horizontal position (do it
on your own responsibility, or use scanner vertical as instructed by Nikon.)
This horizontal action is a blessing for me as I do have tens of thousands
of mounted slides and I use the SF-200 slide feeder as well, which can not
be used vertically.
You will discover with a great disappointment that NikonScan 3.1 is unable
to position the thumbnails correctly (Vuescan auto crop is way, way, really
way better.) You will be forced to adjust them sometimes one by one using
a slider and each time clicking on "Reload Thumbnail," which must be moved
by tiny micrometers/pixels for this kind of adjustment. So badly designed
is the NikonScan! I stopped to use the slider solely and I prefer to enter
the offset values manually "-2", "1", like in Vuescan. This NikonScan
product never ceases to drive me crazy. I got a "level two" case number for
this thumbnail positioning, but I even did not bothered to call them this
time. I did this already so many times, mostly with bug reports and questions
like "do you have an email this time, I want send you Dr.Watson crash
reports" and I have had 4 level two cases. I have no intention to call them
anymore. I quit, I have now a Canon camera and will not replace my Nikon F90
by a successor.
Besides the positioning problem, NikonScan offers a very nice thumbnail
functionality. Many of these operations are undocumented in the miserable
and terse manual (big letters, few words) so that you will have to make
your own experiments to discover all bells and whistles of the batch
processing. Let me just mention that NikonScan allows you to adjust the
scanning params in the preview for each frame individually. You may save
such settings as "User Setting." Than following the windows convention of
multiply selection, press Ctrl and click on all thumbnails demanding a
similar exposure and than apply "Reset To User Settings." This will
overwrite the scan params on the entire set of the selected images.
This is very valuable if you have several groups of images demanding a
different exposure. There is no such support in Vuescan, though.
Regarding SA30 versus SF200, I would recommend to consider the following
factors:
1) SA-30 is a random access device. You can access any frame at any time.
The SF-200 is a sequential processing device. You have to preview one
image and scan the entire batch with these settings, or you have to perform
a series of one by one preview-scan, preview-scan operations. Vuescan
handles both adapters quite well, albeit a bit different.
2) Scanning the film strip or an uncut roll allows to use the entire 36x24mm
image area. Mounted slides does not. The cheap cardboard mounts (or even
the plastic Pakon mounts) take away a whopping 1 mm on each side, thus the
visible area is reduced to mere 34x22mm. Better quality mounts take only
0.5mm on each side (Leica LK, Kaiser, Gepe, Agfa CS) so that the visible
area is 35x23mm. But, if you mount by yourself as I do, you will be able to
rotate slides by up to 3-4 degree in the mounts to compensate the non
horizontal exposures. You can not do that with a roll of film. I wish that
the scanner would be able to twist its scanning mechanism for that purpose.
A digital image rotation is seldom loss free.
3) The SF-200 can not take any customary slide magazines. You have to take
the slides out of the magazines and pile them with care atop of each other
(silk gloves recommended) and than load the pile into the input tray of the
SF-200. The SF-200 ejects the slides in opposite order, so a manual reordering
after a scan is necessary. I prefer to load them back into the magazines
directly out of the SF-200 eject tray. Especially the CS mounts can be grabbed
easy using finger nail. You can keep the magazine upside down while loading
and rotating the mounts. Very convenient. You do not have such luxury with
any other slide system.
4) The SF-200 can not recognize vertical images and will not rotate such
mounts automatically. You have to rotate the slides by hand, and of course,
after the scan you must do it again.
5) The slide mounts rub on each other while being loaded. The cardboard
mounts will lint, prepare for some serious dusting jobs. In some plastic
mounts tiny pieces of plastic may split and become statically charged.
They may than attach themselves to the film surface. This happens e.g.
with the Reflecta CS mounts. The ICE software provided with NikonScan
usually filters this out, but the Vuescan IR cleaning has problems in
dealing with this type of dirt. In such cases you will be forced to
brush these slides and to scan them again.
6) SF-200 may jam. The cardboard mounts may jam during both load and
eject operations. During eject, they may be bend! In my opinion the
SF-200 lacks a significant piece of adjustable misfeeding protection.
I made my own using an old credit card with a cut off corner to fit
into the load tray. It is attached using a paper clip. This trick
allows to adjust the feeding gap to the width of the used mounts.
Since than misfeeds became very seldom. Only the Pakon mounts may hook
into each other and cause a jam anyhow.
7) SF-200 may jam on a sharp teflon edge on the entry to the scanner.
I do not know why this leading edge was designed to have such a 90 degree
2 mm step, but after I took a micro Dremmel and polished it off carefully
to have a 45 degree slope by 1 mm, these jams have never repeated.
8) Sadly, in America you will often face ignorance of the development
lab personnel. They will often cut and mount your film against your will.
Especially the Fuji Lab in Phoenix, Arizona is a plague. I will never
ever again use any Fuji film mailers (I still have 10-15 unused.) In
such cases, your SA-30 will be serving you as a decoration only and you
will have to deal somehow with an unwanted batch of cardboard mounted
slides.
9) While using SF-200 you may conveniently remove the slides from the
output tray and add more slides to the input tray. BUT: in the NikonScan
3.1.1 the Nikon Software people in their infinite wisdom have reduced
the max. number of slides from 999 to 99, so that some time the scan
will stop. Just click on scan again. Vuescan works differently and better:
It keeps scanning till the feeder input tray is empty.
So we have:
Nikon SA-30 and a cookie jar,
Nikon SF-200, an old credit card, a paper clip and a teflon polishing job
This is the contemporary Nikon, it's pathetic. But, on the other hand
if you plan to do batch scan, there is no other solution available for
the $2500... And the LS4000 itself is actually a magnificent scanner,
especially if used with Vuescan.
Ok, it is now your pick. Feel free to add more observations or to correct
any errors in this report.
Thomas.
PS:
By the way, I saw recently that Adorama offers it's own mailers.
I asked the customer service if they will reliably honor the "do
not mount" instruction. They said yes and I will soon get a bunch
of their mailers for a test.
Thomas.
bradleyphillip
Thank you so much for such a detailed reply! Good information about
these batch scanning accessories is very, very difficult to come by.
I really appreciate it.
It looks like I will take your advice and go for a SA-30 with cookie
jar (!). You're right about the dearth of batch scanning solutions.
I have found only the Nikon Coolscan ($2000), the Scitex Eversmart
($13,000-$55,000), and the new Imacon 848 ($50,000+?) are the only
solutions out there for batch! That's too bad!
One thing I noticed is that the Nikon specifications say that with the
SA-30, the scanner will read an area of 23.3x36mm, so it looks like I
will lose my 1mm no matter which way I go. :( Ironically the scanner
will read an area of 25.1x36.8mm when the slide is mounted (!) (Who
*designs* these things???)
Nonetheless, it looks like this is the best solution this side of 5x
the price.
Thank you again, for your help.
bradley phillip
ThomasH <her...@home.com> wrote in message news:<3C016AA1...@home.com>...
ThomasH
>
> ThomasH,
>
> Thank you so much for such a detailed reply! Good information about
> these batch scanning accessories is very, very difficult to come by.
> I really appreciate it.
>
> It looks like I will take your advice and go for a SA-30 with cookie
> jar (!). You're right about the dearth of batch scanning solutions.
> I have found only the Nikon Coolscan ($2000), the Scitex Eversmart
> ($13,000-$55,000), and the new Imacon 848 ($50,000+?) are the only
> solutions out there for batch! That's too bad!
>
> One thing I noticed is that the Nikon specifications say that with the
> SA-30, the scanner will read an area of 23.3x36mm, so it looks like I
> will lose my 1mm no matter which way I go. :( Ironically the scanner
> will read an area of 25.1x36.8mm when the slide is mounted (!) (Who
> *designs* these things???)
Hm... This must be a mistake, I hope. I see this in the manual as well.
They call it "effective aperture", but than the MA20 effective aperture
is even less. It is 22.5 x 34.3 mm, so the manual page 94.
Anyway, the width of the gap in the SA-21 and SA-30 exposing the film
frame to the scanning LED's is 26mm and the lg is over 40mm. So at
least nothing physically covers the film. The "full" aperture is given
as:
25.1 x 36.8 mm for the slide adapter MA20 and
25.1 x 38.0 mm for the film strip adapters SA-21 and SA-30.
While scanning slides, in the preview you can see the borders of the
mounts. And if you have the cardboard junk mounts, you see their
ragged edges and often also some lint on the edge of the image!!
It's a plague.
Do you have any ideas of if where to develop the film and get it back in
ONE piece, always?
Thomas.
bradleyphillip
> bradleyphillip wrote:
> Do you have any ideas of if where to develop the film and get it back in
> ONE piece, always?
>
> Thomas.
Hi, Thomas,
I don't know where you live, but if you live in the SF Bay area, I
recommend Calypso Imaging. They're a professional house, so they also
offer drum scans, LightJet output, and good prices on volume
processing (not the cheapest on the planet, but good for a pro shop).
I'd be very surprised if they didn't get your film processing right,
every time.
I *think* they'll do it by mail, if you're not in the area (Sunnyvale,
CA).
Check them out at www.calypsoinc.com. Even if you can't use them,
they're friendly and might be able to recommend a professional
developer in your area.
Hope that helps,
bradleyphillip
Mac McDougald
gi...@onebox.com says...
> ThomasH <her...@home.com> wrote in message news:<3C02EA55...@home.com>...
> > bradleyphillip wrote:
> > Do you have any ideas of if where to develop the film and get it back in
> > ONE piece, always?
> >
> > Thomas.
IF you don't get automated machine prints, most any local independent
photo shop will give you uncut roll back.
However, if you want cheapie machine prints, often they cannot, as their
equipment will only work with 5 or 6 frame strips.
I often get C-41 or E-6 rolls uncut from my local processor, not for
scanning, but for other reasons.
> Hi, Thomas,
>
> I don't know where you live, but if you live in the SF Bay area, I
> recommend Calypso Imaging.
I used them once when I was in the area during a conference. We needed
quickie E-6 for stuff that folks had shot while there. They were fine.
--
Mac McDougald
Doogle Digital - www.doogle.com
ThomasH
Thanks for the recommendations.
I am also in the Silicon Valley, right on the edge of Sunnyvale. I made
basically a positive experience with Kodak mailers and for the travels
I like to have mailers, than you do not have to carry the films through
several airports. Kodak Lab errs seldom and in most cases their E6 process
is ok. I have though some 2-3 films mishandled! Some sort of nasty imprint
marks are on the film, caused probably by a film transporting roll (neither
ICE nor Vuescan IR cleanup can remove it.) The major problem with Kodak is
the duration of the process. It takes weeks, weeks..
Thomas.
Mac McDougald
Any roller transport system, especially for E-6 is crap.
Quality E-6 processors use big tank dip and dunk machines (very large).
The roller transport machines also mostly use one shot chemistry, pumped
up just for that run. Very poor quality control compared to the large
replinished dip/dunk reservoirs. Also, of course, as you mention, roller
transport machine scratch film (routinely).
ThomasH
Thats why I am intrigued by the new Adorama service. They claim that their
equipment does not touch the film.
Thomas.
Yury Mukharsky
development
> lab personnel. They will often cut and mount your film against your
> will. Especially the Fuji Lab in Phoenix, Arizona is a plague. I
will
> never ever again use any Fuji film mailers (I still have 10-15
unused.)
> In such cases, your SA-30 will be serving you as a decoration only
Can one tape the pieces of film together (thin strip of tape along
preforation?) and use them in SA30? I am thinking more about standard
4-6 frame negative strips, not slides. Will it work with SA-30?
Yury
ThomasH
>
> On 6 Feb 2002 19:08:46 GMT, Yury Mukharsky
> <iouri.mo...@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
>
> >Can one tape the pieces of film together (thin strip of tape along
> >preforation?) and use them in SA30? I am thinking more about standard
> >4-6 frame negative strips, not slides. Will it work with SA-30?
>
> film cement, but because of the limited surface area I don't think
> either would be very strong, and if you goofed you could damage your
> negs.
I would be also worried about the possibility that the film might jam
in the rear roll of the SA-30. This roll may be taken apart, maybe for
such purposes, maybe for cleaning only.
Maybe you should though ask the good question about splicing film in one
of the movie film oriented groups? They glue film for cinematic purposes
very reliably, maybe there is a fine "punctual technique" available
which might serve the purpose? I am afraid though the technique which
they use is probably affecting the adjacent frames, what remains
unnoticed due to the fast rate of frame advancing.
Should you discover something I would appreciate a note about it!
Thanks,
Thomas.
>
> Josh
Yury Mukharsky
@attbi.com:
I was actually thinking about running the tape along the film, not
perpendicular to it - narrow strips along the perforation. However, I
just found that SA30 is a bit too expensive ($500), so I do not think
I will experiment with it any time soon.
I do not quite understand - what is the purpose of this adapter? Is
it just flim strip adapter plus receptacle for the film at the back
end? Can one do without it - open the back gate and put a earlier
suggested coockie jar there?
Yury
ThomasH
>
> ThomasH <Tho...@nospam.way> wrote in news:3C6362F9.2B64BDE4
>
> I do not quite understand - what is the purpose of this adapter? Is
> it just flim strip adapter plus receptacle for the film at the back
> end? Can one do without it - open the back gate and put a earlier
> suggested coockie jar there?
>
> Yury
Indeed, the SA-21 provided with the scanner and the front piece of
the SA-30 are mechanically identical, except that the SA-30 has a
little brush on the film entry. Nikon forces to purchase a virtually
identical piece of redundant hardware at a very high price. The rear
part is a completely external roll attached to the film exit slot on
the back side of the scanner. Thus theoretically with this slot being
opened, the scanner should be able to advance a film strip of any
length with or without the rear part of SA-30.
The SA-21 refuses to take longer film strips or maybe just the
software recognizes it and refuses to scan. If this is only the
NikonScan and for example Vuescan would accept a longer film in SA-21,
maybe indeed you could give it a try. Open the film slot on the rear
side, place any container to collect the film, such as this cookie
jar and give it a try!
:-)
Report if you have succeed. You would have made many people happy
and Nikon very angry!
Thomas.