Jump to content

Silverfast scanner question


Mike Rawcs

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, the bane of film use in the digital age: the scanner.

 

I'm using a Reflecta ProScan 7200 and Silverfast 8 and see in many of my scans faint vertical banding in sky areas. As I process the scans in either Lightroom or Silver Efex Pro the banding becomes more visible, but still faint.

 

I'm scanning at 3600dpi but 7200 dpi produces the same banding. I have the scanner set to produce a multiple exposure scan which I presume gathers more information from the negative. The scanner is new as is the Leica MP so I'm don't think it is a shutter problem; rather a software problem.

 

Has anyone had this with Silverfast 8? It probably is something that I'm doing / not doing.

 

When I use the bundled Reflecta Cyberview X software I get no banding but the interface is very basic (probably why I can't mess it up!).

 

Many thanks for any help,

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help if you could post one of the problematic pictures. I had some problems with banding with this scanner when it was relatively new and it was repaired under warranty. The banding was quite obvious in my case. Later the problems returned and I could solve it by simply dusting off the scan head myself with a blower bulb. It can be easily accessed by unscrewing the four screws at the bottom of the machine and taking off the upper cover. Then switch on the scanner and wait for the scan head to move in forward position, where it can be reached easily by compressed air. However, you will void your warranty, so it's probably best to have it done...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to square one. Are you absolutely sure the banding isn't on the negative? If the film has been poorly processed you can typically get banding adjacent to sprocket holes. It shows up far more in sky's and can either be extreme or very subtle. Often it is caused by over agitation, even under agitation, or stand development.

 

An example would help, but I would doubt it is the scanner unless it is something that looks like a digital artefact or perhaps a reflection.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick replies.

 

Some examples are here:

 

Zenfolio | Mike Rawcliffe | The Film Project

 

Number 6 and 8 show the banding: I know that it's faint but it usually shows on the far right side. I have scanned photo 8 this evening using the bundled software that comes with the scanner and although the software is basic, it gives a good scan with no banding. It may be that I'm not setting up Silverfast properly?

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting Mike, I'll have to think about it. But what is it with #2, that looks like shutter drag?

 

For the banding in the sky on #8, if you have re-scanned it and the banding is gone it may be similar to the effect that under exposure has with a digital camera, it causes banding. You may have hit on a better setting the second time you tried. One thing you should do is make sure the preview scan is of a good quality, at least 1600dpi (if your version of Silverfast supports it). This is used to determine the exposure for the main scan. But it does look like digital banding, not the film, (except #2).

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Steve,

I'll re-scan both frames (they are from different films btw) with the software that comes with the Reflecta scanner and post them as side by side comparisons later. If the banding disappears then it is due to how I am using Silverfast 8 and I'll do more testing there.

 

The negs look well exposed by by that I mean well exposed as in the day when I used a darkroom to print my photographs. Scanning is different for sure.

 

I'll post later when the comparisons are up on my website. Zenfolio are currently doing maintenance on their site so I may have to wait until they are finished to post them but I'll report how the re-scanning goes.

 

Thanks again,

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I see in the examples is not typical banding from dust on the scan head (these look more like more or less clearly defined narrow vertical bright lines). I think Steve is on the right track in post #5.

 

Thanks, and yes, I agree: I think I'm doing too much post processing - 1st Silver Effex Pro (structure) and then Lightroom (clarity). As soon as Zenfolio have finished their system maintenance I'll experiment some more. Hopefully I won't have to scan everything again.

 

I'm not expecting a camera fault as the camera (MP) is only six months old.

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I re-scanned the offending photographs last night; several times and with different permutations but couldn't reproduce the problem. I've posted the photographs here (6 & 7 / 9 & 10)

 

Zenfolio | Mike Rawcliffe | The Film Project

 

and the banding has gone, so I agree that it was over processing. In both cases I was attempting to create a chiaroscuro result by turning the foreground black to remove detail and it was obviously too much. This time I used a film preset (HP5+) to do the job for me.

 

Many thanks for everyone's help.

 

Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

I recently had much trouble with the ProScan 7200, particularly when used in combination with SilverFast Ai Studio 8, so much so that I had to return the scanner for a refund, in the end, after encountering vertical banding issues with five different ProScan 7200’s in a row (and some units were from different batches).

 

I experienced what I consider to be two different forms of vertical banding. The first was random in nature, where moderately severe vertical banding would sometimes appear in scans, particularly noticable in plain areas, such as sky. Whenever this happened, by scanning the same frame again, the resulting scan would either show no noticeable 'random-type' banding the second time, or this type of banding again, but the banding now in different locations. I contacted SilverFast, who advised me to make sure I updated to the latest Reflecta/Cyberview firmware and drivers. It seemed to clear up after doing this.

 

It was the other type of vertical banding I encountered, where I had so much persistent trouble. All five ProScan 7200’s exhibited subtle vertical banding (each unit susceptible to banding which was permanently in the same locations, but in different locations when comparing scans from unit to unit). The banding was visible with (particularly denser) negatives containing large plain areas, such as sky. The problem was particularly evident when using SilverFast, but was also present (though, to a lesser extent) with Cyberview. The attached photo is a good example of this banding, scanned using SilverFast. Also, I found that two of the ProScan 7200's had several dead pixels in the scanner head. After returning the fifth unit for a reluctant refund (I say reluctant, as I very much like the scanner in all other regards), I contacted Reflecta, who confirmed to me that they are, indeed, aware of banding issues, affecting some ProScan 7200's. They then went on to tell me thay are to `re-engineer' (as they put it) the ProScan 7200, presumably to deal with banding issues. I find this difficult to believe, however, as the ProScan 7200 is available to buy, as usual. If it was to be re-engineered, surely they would recall the current stocks, until such time that the updated units were available. I have asked for confirmation on whether they are to modify the ProScan 7200 to deal with banding issues, but they are yet to get back to me.

Edited by D.Page
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...