Silverfast 8 in Windows 7

I am noticing huge difference in image quality when using Silverfast under Windows 7 versus Mac. When viewed at 100% I no longer see  strange jaggies which I saw in Mac version, and the images look actually sharper.

The scan speed is also much faster. Here are some numbers I was able to come up with.

Windows 64bit Silverfast 8.0.1r18  (Plustek Opticfilm 8200i)

  • 7200dpi (with iSRD) 9min 23sec
  • 3600dpi (with iSRD) 3min 13sec

Those make huge difference to the scanning speed with current mac version. I would estimate that Windows version is at least twice as fast. Moreover, the mac version sometimes scans faster and sometimes slower, and iSRD doesn’t work or works on random basis.

I would classify the current mac version unusable. If you are on mac, I recommend using Windows 7 version of Silverfast via bootcamp or Parallels, etc.

The Least Comfortable Solution

Since the current situation is that Silverfast 8 has issues with serious contrast shifts when scanning in higher resolutions in Mac, I resorted into the least comfortable solution; installing the software in Windows 7. Luckily I have Windows 7 installed on bootcamp partition.

According to Silverfast support, apparently the contrast does shift in Windows 7 version of the software as well but it is less dramatic.

They told me that the new version of the software (which should have the issue fixed) will be released in first days of 2013.

Now, looking forward how scanning in Windows 7 goes.

Regarding current version of Silverfast on Mac

Looks like we mac users just need to wait for the fixed software. This is the reply I got from LaserSoft Imaging:

Dear Jaakko,

the framework set we have for internal testing at the moment still shows the issue with
the different exposure value for 7200dpi. We have no installable test version of this at the moment. (…)

The final version that resolves the issue for 7200dpi is – as far as I know – still in development
on Plustek’s side.

Update December 19th:

So I asked to confirm whether they can confirm whether 3600dpi resolution scanning has the same issue. I got a swift reply:

the current driver version shows the different scan speed and the difference in brightness also for 3600dpi scans. We have a driver that works correctly up to 3600dpi, but sometimes shows the issue for 7200dpi.

I asked could I have that driver so I could at least scan with 3600dpi, the answer was no. So I asked when will the fixed software become available and got this reply.

I assume, that we will include it in the next update, or the update after the next one. This may be within the next 3 or 5 weeks. 

I would certainly like if this would be included in the next update.

Therefore it seems that at present, mac users have no access to the higher resolutions.

Response from Silverfast

I got following response from Silverfast regarding the various issues I have had with Plustek Opticfilm 8200i and Silverfast 8. It appears that presently there is no solution other than getting updated driver framework if you are in Mac OSX.

I do feel disappointed because currently there is nothing I can do but wait and the + 50,000 yen scanner is sitting as a paperweight.

I do have to say that the support from Plustek has been excellent though, but if the issue is in the drivers..

Dear Mr. Saari,

like you suspect, this issue is indeed driver related. We are in close contact with Plustek
and are working together with them to get a new framework for this scanner model.

As soon as the new frameworks are implemented, we are going to bring an update that is
resolving this issue. 

Kind regards,

Business Card

Past years I have had a series of business cards, all featuring my “birdie” logo. The previous versions of my business card have titled me as “visualist”, a general word that refers to my visual work in broader sense, mostly of course web design, 3D graphics and such. It could be even said that “visualist” do video, which I have done, although not quite enough.

However, since I have ran out of my business cards, it’s time to make a new one. I thought I will just go ahead and write “photographer” in it. Honestly, I am somehow a bit ashamed to call myself as photographer since I still feel I’m a total beginner. Even in formal sense, I’m just a photography student at the moment.

But it wouldn’t make much sense to write “student of photography” to the business card, now wouldn’t there?

I solve this dilemma by admitting that I will never be quite finished with my studies, any real photographer would say so about their own career as well; it’s a journey. So I hope you’ll forgive me.

Police Work

I love Leonard Freed’s comment regarding his contact sheets in Magnum Contact Sheets “Police Work”:

“Contact sheets are mostly a waste of money, I find. 99.9 per cent of the frames on the contact sheet are mistakes one makes while photographing. Because it is a waste of money, I love them. There are things in life we must do just because we find them unprofitable”.

I couldn’t agree more.

 

Marking the Way

Saito Hisao’s article “Marking the Way” in latest Yokohama Seasider moved me. The people I’ve met in Dark Room Intl. never seize to surprise and humble me. Like Mr. Saito said in his article, some of us beginner photographers are lost, and some don’t even see that they are lost. Myself I know certainly how lost I am, so I think in that sense I’m lucky; I know I’m standing somewhere, but don’t quite know where, and that’s really terrible, huge problem for me.
I certainly, deeply hope that instructors in NYIP are honest and make their best effort to show me my location, like a GPS satellite. I can draw my own roadmap but in order to do that, I need to know my coordinates.

Plustek Opticfilm 8200i Problems

Scanning issues remain. Will update soon.

— snip —

I’m having strange issue with my Plustek Opticfilm 8200i (with Silverfast 8.0.1r18).

If I scan the image in 2400dpi I get the exact image which looks like the image in Prescan, so all is well, the quality looks great. But should I up the resolution to 3600, the image becomes dark and usually results unusable image. Oddly sometimes 7200dpi is fine.

Whatever I do I can’t get the resulting image that’s written to disk match the image I’m seeing in Pre-scan in 3600dpi.

I wonder if I’m missing some key element here; I’m using NegaFix and 48-24bit setting and nothing fancy. I usually don’t even use Auto CCR. If you have a similar issue, would you let me know?