SilverFast 8 Batch Scan/ ADF Scan

[lawmanx]

Hi, I just upgrade to SilverFast8 but has problem when using Batch Scan with my Nikon CoolscanVED scanner. I used to specify the filename and sequence number to be used when batch scan. But I can't find how to set in SilverFast 8. Please advice. Thanks.

[LSI_Ketelhohn]

Dear customer,

The file name and storage path is defined in the scan dimensions tab.
The numbering is done automatically.

kind regards,
Arne Ketelhohn

[lawmanx]

Dear customer,

The file name and storage path is defined in the scan dimensions tab.
The numbering is done automatically.

kind regards,
Arne Ketelhohn

Thanks for your reply but I still cannot find the way to set the filename become automatic. When I scan a strip of film (6 photos) with ADF scan, it does scan all 6 photo, but it only save to the same filename speified in the "Scan dimensions" tab. i.e. they overwrite each other and at the end I only get 1 photo scan (but 6 times of time spent).

Also, I have a new question. How to set the film strip offset in SilverFast 8 ? I can do it in 6.6 but can't find the way in 8. Please help. Many thanks.

Regards,
Law

[sjohnston]

I am also having problems with ADF scans--using Silverfast 8 and the Coolscan 9000. I have two questions:
1. If I cancel after scanning frame #1 to make some adjustments, how do I tell Silverfast to start scanning with frame #1 again when I click ADF Scan? It always seems to skip ahead to frame #2 or frame #3.
2. How do I set the frame sequence number? Also, how do I choose the number of zeros padding the number? This was easy with Silverfast 6.6. I need to start the batch scan with "00" or "01" depending on where the frame numbers begin on my roll of film.

Thanks.

[LSI_Ketelhohn]

The file numbering now always looks like this:
filename (1)
filename (2)

We have already forwarded a feature request for the advanced file numbering due to the interest in this feature.

kind regards,
Arne Ketelhohn.

[lucsax]

I really need to point out that the auto numbering feature in 6.6 was fine, the one in 8 is.....emmh .... embarrassing.
it seems to me a rather basic feature, I rind that it's almost impossible to work this way. I really hope you are working hard on it and to see an update very soon ....

[lsteyn]

What is the expected development timeline for this. Version 8 is a downgrade in this respect as the batch scan functionality and file naming convention worked just fine in version 6. ADF is obviously not true batch scanning as it does not make provision for number of items in the batch and sequential numbering.

[LSI_Morales]

Hi there

What is the expected development timeline for this. Version 8 is a downgrade in this respect as the batch scan functionality and file naming convention worked just fine in version 6. ADF is obviously not true batch scanning as it does not make provision for number of items in the batch and sequential numbering.

There is not a specific development deadline for this, since the implementation of this feature also affects other features and has proved to be much more complicated than it put in words. Our programmers are working on this on a daily basis to have the features as soon as possible.

Thanks for your patience and understanding

Kind regards

[Flash]

What is the expected development timeline for this. Version 8 is a downgrade in this respect as the batch scan functionality and file naming convention worked just fine in version 6. ADF is obviously not true batch scanning as it does not make provision for number of items in the batch and sequential numbering.

Yes, I fully agree.
I also mandatory need an intelligent user defined file naming convention as the one we had in v6 for high volume (batch) scan.
This is a real showstopper for me and have to revert back to v6.
Hope that you'll add this functionaly back asap.

Kind regards.

[LSI_Morales]

Hi there

I also mandatory need an intelligent user defined file naming convention as the one we had in v6 for high volume (batch) scan.

Your vote has been counted

Best regards

[Bootsman1#]

Since Mr. Morales seems to like counting votes, I like to add mine. I'm really upset by the fact that real batchscanning in not possible in version 8. Not what I expected from an upgrade. I feel mislead. Batchscanning was the main reason for me to buy the 'up'grade. A lot of money down the drain now. I also have to turn back to the 6.6 version.

[mspinolo]

another vote for this point: sorry but it is really embarrassing not being able to manage filenames

[phototutor]

Having upgraded, at substantial cost, to SilverFast Ai Studio 8 I am appalled to find how bad this "new and improved" version is.

I'll confine my remarks and questions to the use of SF for scanning negatives using a Nikon 8000 film scanner.

1) Where is the documentation? How can you sell a complex program like SF without adequate information and explanation of how to use it. Despite the constant repetition of the word "intuitive" in the LaserSoft videos SilverFast is anything but intuitive, and version 8 less so than its predecessor! For example, since when does "batch scan" not mean what it does in every other scanning program? And ADF (Automatische Dokumentenzufuhr)? How intuitive is that? Not at all in English and perhaps not auf Deutsch either. In addition the various videos and "help" links all refer to Ver. 6.6, and are, consequently, almost useless. So is the Quick Guide since it is concerned mostly, if not totally, with the use of of SF with a flatbed scanner.

2. The following is an exchange regarding prescans with Ver. 6.6

From a User: "One thing present in Nikonscan I'd like to see in Silverfast is a prescan of all the pictures than after individual corrections, the possibility to launch a batch. If Nikonscan does, why not Silverfast."

From LaserSoft: "Simply because Nikon Scanners make that especially hard to do and only Nikon knows exactly how
As we left the "help" of the Nikon Drivers we have to find out all by ourselves now but in turn we can work more stable on Leopard & intel."

That was Leopard, this is Lion! "Hard to do"? Perhaps, but I know,as do many others, a program that does it - and has always done it! ( For some reason the name of this scanning program is written always with asterisks - like G*D. Is it forbidden to mention the name?)

3. Please do something with the JobManager that makes it both easier and more comprehensible to use, not to mention useful. Ver 6.6 was pretty good - Ver 8 is almost not worth bothering with. Ditto for Overview. Maybe with proper documentation they could be understood.

4. I scan B/W negatives as raw files ("HDR"). SilverFast saves them in TIFF format. Why are they not saved in a non-destructable format, e.g. DNG? And why do that? Well, the raw file is equivalent to a negative: it has all the information. and that cannot be changed other than by taking a knife to it! Obviously if the raw file is a TIFF, the image can be edited and then the original scan can be overwritten, however accidentally, and thus destroyed. And why use the acronym, HDR, when its meaning is generally understood to refer to a different form of high dynamic range image? In addition, the scanning program that cannot be named provides the capability for simultaneously capturing both a raw file (.dng) and a TIFF file that contains edits!

Enough for now.

[BookDude]

Here's another vote for the sequential numbering feature. SF 8 is simply unusable for my business without this feature.

Going back to a previous version of SF is also not an option because there appears to be no previous version that works with Mac OSX 10.7.

[marekv]

I'd like to add my vote for batch scanning, definitely including the file naming/numbering mechanisms from 6.x. In particular, I need
a) To be able to specify which slides I want to scan; with a Reflecta DigitDia with a 100-slide magazine "scan all" is simply not an option; I also do not have the time to start a prescan, then come back and manually click to select, then go away for the "real" scan
b) To reflect the slide tray numbers into the file names, instead of just having a 1,2,3... numbering

6.x did both and works well, though it has some strange interactions with Win7x64 - but that could be the scanner driver, so I won't bring that up here. I scan slides commercially, at least 20.000 / year, and can absolutely not use SF 8 in its current state.

Being a professional software developer myself, I appreciate the balance you have to make between features, "mandatory" adaptations to operating systems, scanners, drivers, etc., debugging and all the other tasks that come along. The 6.x GUI badly needed a redesign and SF 8 is an improvement - and I'm sure it works well for single photos. But for high-volume work like mine it's essentially useless, not so much because of any fundamental flaws, but because the selection/naming/numbering features are simply not there. Add those and I'll seriously consider an upgrade.

A really good workflow results when I can HDRi-scan the correctly selected and named set of slides from a magazine as single batch operation (I tell it what to do up-front and go away while it scans); then later on *quickly* preview through all of them to see what the auto-settings will result in, correct the (generally few!) ones that need manual work, and leave the computer again while it processes them. With 6.x HDR Studio I almost got there; if you can achieve *that* then I will quite happily give you more money . Until then, it's 6.x for me.