Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Martin, good review. I've had mine since Christmas and I am delighted with it. It suits my needs perfectly. regards Mark Pope Swindon Wilts, UK http://www.monomagic.co.uk http://www.leica-gallery.net/mark-pope http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.pope4/Galleries/PAW/index.htm - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin Howard" <mvhoward@mac.com> To: "Leica Users Group LUG" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2003 5:12 AM Subject: [Leica] Review: Minolta Dimage Dual Scan III > > I was recently humming and haring about which option I should choose: > cheap digital P&S, expensive digital SLR, or a film scanner. While at > first glance option three may have seemed obvious (and in retrospect it > certainly does), I was out of touch with the cost/performance ratio of > modern scanners (i.e., those released the past 18 months) that it > didn't first occur to me. > > Fortunately, one of the advantages of a 768kbps Internet pipe plugged > into the back of your computer is that Google is always available. A > few review sites later and I determined that the $300 Minolta Dimage > Dual Scan III seemed like the perfect choice for me. > > Having now used it for about three weeks, I thought it might be time to > summarize and post my experiences to the LUG, for the benefit of those > who might be interested in a similar purchase. > > I should prefix all this by telling you how I use my equipment. I > shoot on (conventional) B&W film which I either develop myself, or have > commercially developed. The scanner is used to either produce 72 dpi > images for the web (about 600-800 pixels along the longest dimension) > or to produce 5x7" prints on a photo quality inkjet printer. My reason > for buying the scanner and printer was to close the photographic loop, > so that I can shoot film and get prints and, thus, hopefully learn to > become a better photographer. In other words, to me, it's a learning > tool. I'm not producing 11x14" quad-black prints to mount and hang on > a wall. (I've only had the Canon i950 printer for about 1.5 weeks, so > I'll post a review on that in a while once I've used it some more.) > > First off, I'm very impressed by this scanner. It performs admirably > for my needs. Scanning is always done at the maximum resolution of > 2820 dpi, which produces 56 Mb RGB files. It is ColorSync aware, so I > am able to use a colour managed process (although I have no hardware > calibration tool). I'm using a G4 PowerBook which only has the USB 1.1 > interface, so scanning is a bit slow (especially on the 8x setting), > but then I'm not in a hurry. > > The bundled software comes in two versions. An "Easy" program which I > never use and a "Utility" program which affords a great deal of control > over the scanning process. Four basic media settings (colour neg, > colour pos, B&W neg, B&W pos) are the starting point and affect the > entire six negs in the film strip holder, while other controls allow > individual control per negative (or, the whole strip, if you choose). > > My basic workflow is this: I load the film into the scanner, set the > film type, and do an index scan. From this I select the frames that > I'm interested in scanning and do a preview scan. The histogram tool > shows whether the scanner is capturing the full density range. The > scanner, by default, scans outside the negative area, thus capturing > some of the film holder too, which is perfect, because it provides an > "absolute black" reference point. As a result, I never crop in the > scanner, although this is an option. > > If necessary, I use the exposure control to lighten or darken the whole > image. The histogram shows both Master levels, and individual R, G, & > B histograms. An advanced, "Curves"-like gamma/contrast control (for > those of you familiar with Photoshop) is available and a great tool for > fine tuning the scan. For well exposed negatives, I usually don't have > to do anything, except confirm that things look good. In short, the > software makes good initial guesses, that usually only require a little > tweaking to produce good, clean scans. > > Difficult negatives can be handled in two ways. One is to scan them as > a positive and then invert the image in Photoshop. This seems to > capture a greater range of densities, but is tricky, because all you > have to learn that a scan that is going to be good looks really dark on > the monitor when you're tweaking it. > > The other trick is to do a two-pass scan: once with the exposure > setting lower, the other with it set higher (I use -0.5 and +0.5 as > starting points; +/- 2.0 are the maximum endpoints). Then, using Curve > Adjustment Layers in Photoshop, you can recombine the two scans into a > single image with a much greater range of tones than a single scan > would enable. In particular, if there is detail in both deep shadow > and in sunlit highlight, this is a good option. > > I tried Vuescan, but found that it was unstable in Mac OS X 10.2.3 (it > crashed almost every time I used it) and the interface was obtuse and > unnecessarily complex compared to the software bundled with the scanner > itself. > > The scanner does not come with advanced dust and scratch removal > algorithms. There is an "auto dust brush" feature that seems to work > better the more you overscan (which is why I have it enabled and the 8x > multiple scan as default). Personally, I use a little blower brush on > the negatives before I scan the film, and the "Healing Brush" or > "Healing Patch" in Photoshop 7 and it clears up things nicely. But > then, as mentioned, I'm not producing museum quality 11x14" prints, so > for critical use, you'd best try it before deciding. > > For my kind of use, and for the $300 price tag, I find the Minolta > Dimage Dual Scan III to be a steal. Good quality scans and easy to use > software mean that I'm very happy with this little workhorse. > > M. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html