> Hello All,

> I posted this on another forum but having no reply I will try here.

> For those of you who still scan, use a Nikon Coolscan 4000 or 5000,
> and do manual focusing, what range do you consider acceptable? I
> usually measure the center, then 4 points each about 3/4 toward each
> corner, plus any important part of the picture. Depending on the
> curvature of the transparency, I have low ranges between extremes
> starting at about 4 points (especially if pictures are fresh from the
> lab and still flat), and high ranges of 15 or more. I consider that
> between 4 and 8-9 I am safe, the image will be sharp and QC will
> accept it; from 9-10 to 12-13 it will probably be sharp enough for
> Alamy QC; at 14 or more I begin to worry; you can start to see soft
> areas where the individual pixels disappear. Sometimes letting the
> picture heat up in the scanner and doing a second scan betters the
> score; or turning the picture around, placing it upside down. Any data
> from others will be appreciated.

> By the way the pdf manual of the Nikon 5000 says that Digital Ice is
> the same as on the 9000 and can be used with Kodachrome. Any practical
> confirmation?

> Thank you for replies.

> Jacques Jangoux

range

>I would like to apologize to Jacques and the group for this late
> posting.

> I start by finding the high point and the low point. The high point is
> usually off center a bit, and the low point is in the opposite corner.
> If the difference between these is 20 or less, I just split the
> difference. If the difference is more than 20 (my record is 45), part
> of the image will inevitably become blurred. At this point I can
> either decide which parts of the image to place out of focus; or I can
> scan the image twice (at different focus settings) and combine the
> two scans in Photoshop with a mask layer.

> I seem to recall an earlier thread that said the 9000 focuses no
> better than the 4000/5000 -- and that's the reason I haven't moved up
> yet. I'd like to know if I'm wrong about that.

> Jim Hargan
> Images of North Carolina
> nc.harganonline.com
> www.harganonline.com

> --- In STOCKPH...@yahoogroups.com, "Jacques Jangoux" <jangoux@...> wrote:

>> Hello All,

>> I posted this on another forum but having no reply I will try here.

>> For those of you who still scan, use a Nikon Coolscan 4000 or 5000,
>> and do manual focusing, what range do you consider acceptable? I
>> usually measure the center, then 4 points each about 3/4 toward each
>> corner, plus any important part of the picture. Depending on the
>> curvature of the transparency, I have low ranges between extremes
>> starting at about 4 points (especially if pictures are fresh from the
>> lab and still flat), and high ranges of 15 or more. I consider that
>> between 4 and 8-9 I am safe, the image will be sharp and QC will
>> accept it; from 9-10 to 12-13 it will probably be sharp enough for
>> Alamy QC; at 14 or more I begin to worry; you can start to see soft
>> areas where the individual pixels disappear. Sometimes letting the
>> picture heat up in the scanner and doing a second scan betters the
>> score; or turning the picture around, placing it upside down. Any data
>> from others will be appreciated.

>> By the way the pdf manual of the Nikon 5000 says that Digital Ice is
>> the same as on the 9000 and can be used with Kodachrome. Any practical
>> confirmation?

>> Thank you for replies.

>> Jacques Jangoux

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
>  Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
>    STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
>     STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links