LaserSoft Imaging

I submitted this query to LaserSoft support a week ago but have not gotten a response, so I thought I'd see if the Forum members can help me. My problem is that the Output Size as indicated on the Frame tab is not what I get after the scan is completed. What I do is lock the frame size to "proportional" then set the output size to a fixed number of pixels (for example 1600x2000 for an 8x10 at 200 dpi) and lock those. Then I adjust the frame to the cropping I want. After the scan is completed, the size is NOT 1600x2000 but is a few pixels smaller -- 1596x1995. The proportions are correct but the absolute size is wrong.

I searched the forum and found a 2-year old thread where the writer described exactly the same problem (viewtopic.php?t=1061&highlight=output+size ). The thread concluded with a note from Gregory C stating that the problem was fixed for version v6.0.1r23.

It seems the fix did not carry over to later versions because I'm using SilverFast version 6.2.3r3 for the Nikon LS4000 negative scanner and the Microtek Scanmaker 6800 flatbed scanner. Both exhibit the same behavior, as did my earlier version 6.6.2r1. My operating system is Windows XP Home.

Has anyone else noticed this difficulty, or have I got some problem with my setup? Thanks!

Dear bindlestiff

we need to examine this more closely in our internal testing center.
Please help us by providing the SF_Logfile for further analysis.

Preferably, use contact LaserSoft Imaging support staff via the problem report form: http://www.silverfast.com/problemreport/en.html

The SF_Logfile can be pasted into the problem report.
On a Windows XP system the SF_Logfile is placed within /Documents and Settings/(your username)/Application Data/LaserSoft Imaging.
If you haven't yet changed the standard setting of the Windows Explorer you won't see any folder "Application Data". You then want to open the folder options dialogue (from "Extras" the menu) and go to the "View" tab. There you can enable the Explorer to show you hidden and system files and folders as well as displaying the contents of system folders.

You could of course also you the search function of your system to find the "SF_Logfile". Please make sure that you will be shown hidden and system files. The SF_Logfile is always created anew when SilverFast is started up, even if no scanner can be found, it will be created.

Simply open it with your text editor (double clicking the SF_Logfile) and select all the text (CTRL+A). Then copy the selection to the clipboard (CTRL+C).
Go back to the problem report and click inside the text field. Move the text cursor to the end of your problem description and insert the SF_Logfile from the clipboard (CTRL+V).

We also would need a file called "SF Statistics" which lists the details on the scan settings which seem to be problematic on your machine.
You can generate it from the (button on the horizontal panel in the settings window:) "Expert Dialogue" -> button "Output Statistics" [see a screenshot at: viewtopic.php?p=10289 ].

Thanks in advance for your co-operation.

Kind regards
Sonny Noack
- technical support, LSI AG -

I reported to Lasersoft a couple of months ago that many people today are scanning for onscreen or inkjet output without the need for screen printing and ppi; ie, we know how many pixels we want. unfortunately, SilverFast is engineered for screen printing.

as a result, whenever you resize a selection frame in the Preview window:
1. the output resolution remains unchanged even if you switched to pixel units and locked the output dimensions.
2. SF calculates the new physical output size and consequent pixel count of the selection based on the resolution setting.

this problem also exists with the Job Manager. it is not possible to assign (via JM Copy/Paste) pixel count dimensions to every image in the Job Manager queue and get what you expected if the images in the JM queue differ in size from the current preview image. again, SF remembers the resolution (or physical output size) rather than the pixel count. so whenever you Copy/Paste output dimensions to other images in the JM queue, you are in fact pasting the output resolution (or physical output size; I can't remember which it is just this moment).

for those of us not in screen printing, it's confusing and disorientating. as I said before, we know how many pixels we want. we don't need SF recalculating pixel count for us.

I have asked for pixel-based resizing and locking but it's not going to happen any time soon.


regards
Gregory