[Kiwizinho]

I finally wrote this up. The core of the article is how to deal with VueScan's multi-crop settings (which defeated me for years) but I have written it up as a complete workflow.

Scanning Negatives with VueScan (Multi-frame)

Thanks. I don't have VueScan, however I think it might be one of the few software packages that supports older scanners with full functionality. (Microsoft's built in scanner software is pretty useless when it comes to scanning slides and negatives.)

For now the software that came with my Canon scanner still works, but only in 32 bit mode, so I can't scan directly into Photoshop. Paintshop Pro comes with dual 32/64 bit versions, with Twain support, so I can scan that way.

I think I do need to work on getting more accurate colour calibration. I scanned some artwork of my daughter's recently that was pure black and white line art (black ink, not pencil), and the results were quite noticeably off and required adjustment.

I think the Epson scanner has the advantage over the Canon if it's what I'm thinking of, in that it can scan negatives of basically any size such as glass plate negatives as the full lid can provide illumination, but the Canon only has a strip in the middle that can do a couple of rows of 35mm negatives, one row of 35mm slides, or one row of 120 negatives. The only catch at the time was it cost around twice the price if I remember.

[zkarj]

I don't have VueScan, however I think it might be one of the few software packages that supports older scanners with full functionality. (Microsoft's built in scanner software is pretty useless when it comes to scanning slides and negatives.)

Yes, I mention in the article that I first bought VueScan because it could run my then-ancient HP scanner. It's also cross-platform. I did run into an interesting problem with it when I got my Apple Silicon Mac. They were pretty quick to support it with a native build, but that actually created a problem because Epson, being a scanner/printer manufacturer, doesn't update drivers very often, if ever, and only provided Intel-compiled drivers. So I have to run VueScan in Intel mode — which is totally fine and has zero downside, but it did take a bit of puzzling to get to that point.

I think the Epson scanner has the advantage over the Canon if it's what I'm thinking of, in that it can scan negatives of basically any size such as glass plate negatives as the full lid can provide illumination, but the Canon only has a strip in the middle that can do a couple of rows of 35mm negatives, one row of 35mm slides, or one row of 120 negatives. The only catch at the time was it cost around twice the price if I remember.

My Epson Perfection V370 Photo only has the strip so I can only do 35mm — either a six neg strip or four slides at a time. But at least I can set it up quickly then walk off and leave it to do all the frames. The latest Epson software, at least last time I tried it a year or so ago, was even easier to use in that it detected each frame, except it had less control over the other scanning parameters and then when it couldn't detect some frames (like massively underexposed ones) there was little you could do to get around it apart from going "full manual" which was harder than it needed to be.

---------- Post added 09-27-2021 at 08:21 PM ----------

Also... signature updated.

[Kiwi645hauler]

Thanks. I don't have VueScan, however I think it might be one of the few software packages that supports older scanners with full functionality. (Microsoft's built in scanner software is pretty useless when it comes to scanning slides and negatives.)

For now the software that came with my Canon scanner still works, but only in 32 bit mode, so I can't scan directly into Photoshop. Paintshop Pro comes with dual 32/64 bit versions, with Twain support, so I can scan that way.

I think I do need to work on getting more accurate colour calibration. I scanned some artwork of my daughter's recently that was pure black and white line art (black ink, not pencil), and the results were quite noticeably off and required adjustment.

I think the Epson scanner has the advantage over the Canon if it's what I'm thinking of, in that it can scan negatives of basically any size such as glass plate negatives as the full lid can provide illumination, but the Canon only has a strip in the middle that can do a couple of rows of 35mm negatives, one row of 35mm slides, or one row of 120 negatives. The only catch at the time was it cost around twice the price if I remember.

Another option is SilverFast, i currently use it with a Canon CS9000F Mk II, i have been scanning with that for a couple of years now after moving from the Canon software. The control allowed in Silverfast is pretty impressive, as is the built in library of film emulsion presets for color corrections. Each frame can be adjusted individually at prescan then batch scanned at each frames setting.. On my old laptop a full strip of 12 35mm colour negs does take about 2hrs to scan at 4800dpi but the results are pretty impressive.

[zkarj]

First outing today for my brand new DA55-300 PLM WR RE. I decided to set it on f/8 and carry on as I used to with the WR (which was at f/11). The main difference was of course the insane focusing speed, which seems to have nailed every single shot I took — exposing my dodgy tracking with some motion blur on a handful of shots. I blame the bright conditions and sunglasses for that problem. I think the results are plenty sharp at f/8, though with more light, the shutter speed is quicker and

The full set of 10 are here but here are a couple of examples.

[NZ_Ross]

First outing today for my brand new DA55-300 PLM WR RE.

Nice, I am pleased you are enjoying the lens. As you say, focussing speed is a real plus with this lens

[zkarj]

The control allowed in Silverfast is pretty impressive

I thought I'd give it a look. What a palaver! I don't like the fact I have to pick my precise scanner model (which as of version 9 at least you can transfer the license to a different scanner!) and it's a whole rigmarole to download and install and download and install (no that's not a typo). Worst of all making me sign up on the web site just to demo it and then with a fairly stringent password recipe, not letting me copy and paste! That's user hostile and of no benefit to security.

VueScan = download one file — 6744 scanners — open, drag, drop, run, done.

[zkarj]

And now it turns out you need the €249 version just to scan to a 16/48-bit file. Hard pass from me.

[MarkJerling]

First outing today for my brand new DA55-300 PLM WR RE. I decided to set it on f/8 and carry on as I used to with the WR (which was at f/11). The main difference was of course the insane focusing speed, which seems to have nailed every single shot I took — exposing my dodgy tracking with some motion blur on a handful of shots. I blame the bright conditions and sunglasses for that problem. I think the results are plenty sharp at f/8, though with more light, the shutter speed is quicker and

The full set of 10 are here but here are a couple of examples.

Those are not as good as your usual shots Alistair. I can't see the rivets.
Just winding you up, of course, these shots are lovely.

[richandfleur]

First outing today for my brand new DA55-300 PLM WR RE. I decided to set it on f/8 and carry on as I used to with the WR (which was at f/11). The main difference was of course the insane focusing speed

Great shots, very impressive.

Yes that lens focussing is silent and mental fast.

So much so that I do wonder if a large component to Pentax's comparitively poor focussing performance has been the control loop lag/delays/slack etc, coming from the mechanilcal linakge of the legacy in body motor focussing approach. Yikes what an ugly long sentance.
Traditionally I've found Pentax to nail the focus on staionary items, but often with a quick shuffle forwards and backwards to confirm the focus point. Control loop wise, has a bit of overshoot, but does settle to the right place.
That action looks pretty yuck in video but in stills works fine, though is often slower than other brands with in lens motors.

With the PLM it's damn near instant. That lens in incredibly fast and accurate and quiet with the focussing. I'm totally sold on it, and it's an experience I didn't think I'd ever have on a Pentax body.

I haven't done much tracking with it yet, usually likes of kids triathlon when they were running towards us etc, but assume it will be faster in that instance as well.

[zkarj]

Those are not as good as your usual shots Alistair. I can't see the rivets.
Just winding you up, of course, these shots are lovely.

I've been looking at the published shots and thinking they look over-sharpened. Considering I used the same preset I always use (as a starting point) I may need look at dialling that back a little. Mind you, I was intrigued by the textures brought out in the partly-into-sun shot of the Air New Zealand A320. Either side of the specular highlight along the top of the fuselage you can see rivets at every fuselage frame.

With the PLM it's damn near instant. That lens in incredibly fast and accurate and quiet with the focussing. I'm totally sold on it, and it's an experience I didn't think I'd ever have on a Pentax body.

I haven't done much tracking with it yet, usually likes of kids triathlon when they were running towards us etc, but assume it will be faster in that instance as well.

For the first time, I am tempted to leave the camera in AF.C.

AF.C with the older 55-300 models was an exercise in noise pollution as the damn thing would have perfect focus and then in an effort to make a minor necessary adjustment would go on a hunt. Meanwhile 'Ricky Baker' (whatever the intended subject was) had long gone bush (out of range) and the opportunity was lost. (Apologies for the movie references. I couldn't help myself.)

Then again, I first heard, then saw, one of the aforementioned Skylarks when I was at the airport. I wondered if I could get some kind of (lame) photo, but on raising the camera, the lens was a long way off the focus distance it needed and seemed unable to do anything about it. It was one instance only, so time will tell, and I wasn't familiar enough with the lens yet to offer assistance with Quick Shift. Though I did note the leaflet that came with the lens said not to use Quick Shift unless the shutter button is half way down. I assume this relates to the camera having to be told what's happening electronically which maybe can't happen without the shutter button half down?

[MarkJerling]

I've been looking at the published shots and thinking they look over-sharpened. Considering I used the same preset I always use (as a starting point) I may need look at dialling that back a little. Mind you, I was intrigued by the textures brought out in the partly-into-sun shot of the Air New Zealand A320. Either side of the specular highlight along the top of the fuselage you can see rivets at every fuselage frame.

I don't know about "over sharpened", to me they look beautifully sharp.

[Kiwi645hauler]

I thought I'd give it a look. What a palaver! I don't like the fact I have to pick my precise scanner model (which as of version 9 at least you can transfer the license to a different scanner!) and it's a whole rigmarole to download and install and download and install (no that's not a typo). Worst of all making me sign up on the web site just to demo it and then with a fairly stringent password recipe, not letting me copy and paste! That's user hostile and of no benefit to security.

VueScan = download one file — 6744 scanners — open, drag, drop, run, done.

I tried VueScan before i decided on SilverFast, i found that VueScan didnt suit my workflow, whereas for some reason, SilverFast does.. I am pretty picky when it comes to sorting each frame individually, so i dont mind the interface and taking a lot of time to set up a scan, as i get results that are what i want, and also its easy to import to Affinity Photo

[Arpe]

The main difference was of course the insane focusing speed, which seems to have nailed every single shot I took

Welcome to my world!

[Kiwizinho]

First outing today for my brand new DA55-300 PLM WR RE. I decided to set it on f/8 and carry on as I used to with the WR (which was at f/11). The main difference was of course the insane focusing speed, which seems to have nailed every single shot I took — exposing my dodgy tracking with some motion blur on a handful of shots. I blame the bright conditions and sunglasses for that problem. I think the results are plenty sharp at f/8, though with more light, the shutter speed is quicker

Great images!

---------- Post added 09-30-21 at 01:05 PM ----------

Great shots, very impressive.

Hi Richard,

I think you're the first one to draw attention to the quick focusing of the lens.

I worked out for my use case scenario, I probably won't use the lens often enough to justify the expense to get faster focusing so I'm happy to have acquired an older screw drive version.

You also mentioned you have the 16-85 though, and one of the reasons I didn't want to spend too much at the longer end is I found I actually take quite a lot of photos at the wide end so if I'm going to spend up on anything, this would be a better area to invest.
What are your thoughts on this lens? It's not PLM, although has a motor rather than screwdrive, but I notice a few reviewers mention some quirky focusing behaviour at the wider end with a tendency to miss focus a bit too often.
Some day when I'm feeling wealthier, the DA* 11-18/2.8 is tempting, but it's up there with the K-3 III price wise, whereas the 16-85 is priced within reach of mere mortals, and it covers my most used focal lengths.
Apart from AF in general, what's close focusing like? I use my D-FA 100/2.8 macro quite a bit but a non-macro lens with reasonable minimum focus distance and magnification could well be sufficient most of the time for stuff like fungi that often aren't all that small.

[zkarj]

I'm happy to have acquired an older screw drive version.

It's an awesome lens. It may be 'older', and certainly the tech in the PLM version is 'brand new', but as we all here know, age is no barrier to a good lens!