LaserSoft Imaging

Hi,

I've got two major problems:

1. Focus and Job Manager
I'm having big trouble with Silverfast Ai for my Minolta 5400. I am using job manager to scan four transparencies at a time - setting each one up individually, some with autofocus, some manual (and other settings applied to each image). The trouble is that when I come to run the job manager batch, I have noticed that the focus settings I spent so much time over are not getting applied to each frame when the frame is being scanned! This is very obvious, because a) some images are way out of focus b) the manual focus knob on the front of the scanner does not rotate to the correct position for each frame.

2. Output Resoltion
My second issue relates to the resolution settings for a saved frame. I know how to save particular settings for a frame, but when I come to retrieve the settings, the resolution I entered is never the same. For example, I want to scan at an aspect ratio of 1:1.5 with an output resolution of 7200x4800. Now logic would dictate that if I saved this as a Frame, when I retrieve it I would get the same numbers, but no! What is going on? I have constrained the proportions (chain is not broken) and locked the output with the little lock icons. As an example, I enter:
Original: 300x200; Scale%: 2400x2400; Output: 7200x4800. What I get back is something very different and I have to redo all the inputs.

And then sometimes when I actually scan I get a different resolution to the one specified in the job manager! ie it shows 7200x4800 in the job manager overview for each image, in reality I get something like 7178x4822! What?

Surely the frame settings should lock this down? I could do this in the really awful minolta software and save a a text file, so why not in my very expensive silverfast software? This is just not good enough! If I want to specify resolution, I want to specify resolution! This is a pretty important feature especially when trying to scan a whole photo-shoot that I want printing at an exact size at 300dpi...

Can anyone help me with these two issues? I've been going through the manual and forums, but cannot get any answers... If there is some setting I've missed, then I'll honestly eat my words, but at the moment it looks like the software has got bugs!

Thanks for anyone's time on this - you'd be helping to save me loads...

Rob

Dear Rob

please download and install the latest update for your version of SilverFast from our website.
You might experience that this already does solve your problem.

If you need to update a SilverFast Ai version, please do register with us at our website (cf. Support -> Registration):
https://www.silverfast.com/reg/en.html
(This needs to be done only once.)

However, if the problem persists, please don't hesitate to contact LaserSoft Imaging support staff: https://www.silverfast.com/problemreport/en.html

I would appreciate if you could paste a fresh copy of the SF_Logfile in the problem report.

On a Mac OS X PC you will find the SF_Logfile in /Users/(your username)/Library/Preferences/LaserSoft Imaging.

On a Windows 2000 or 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.

On older operating systems like Windows 98/ME or Mac OS 9 you will most probably find the SF_Logfile within the the program folder of Adobe Photoshop /Plugins/Import-Export/(SilverFast).

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 (Win: CTRL+A; Mac: CMD+A). Then copy the selection to the clipboard (CTRL+C / CMD+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 / CMD+V).

Thanks in advance for your co-operation.

Kind regards
Sonny Noack
- technical support, LSI AG -

Hello robbrown99,

RE: 2. Output Resolution
I know this might sound silly, but in the interest of trying to help, do you change the bounding box size after setting the aspect ratio?

Thanks Sonny, I've upgraded to v6.4.1r3 (I was on r2). I've done a few scans and appear to be having the same problems as before.

RAG, yes a good point and thanks for the post. I did check this, I'll come on to that...read on if you're feeling strong!


Perhaps my understanding of how Silverfast should operate is in fact different to how it DOES operate (and how it was designed to operate)? Maybe I want it to do something it cannot?


In terms of the second problem of output resolution, here is my experience/experiment of how Silverfast works...

- To set the input resolution I use the 'Original' resolution boxes. I unclick the chain so that it is broken and unlock the locks on the Output resolution so that I can change the width:height ratio. As this is a 35mm frame, I enter 300x:200y =1:1.5 (pixels). Now that will set the ratio correctly.

- Next I enter the Actual (Output) resolution I require in the Output boxes to 3600x2400. My dpi is set to 300 (q=1.5, screen=200). This will therefore give me an image (I hope) of EXACTLY 3600x2400. Printed at 300dpi this is 12x8. Pretty standard I think?

- Now I lock the two little lock icons + the chain to LOCK the final output to 3600x2400 and also LOCK the width:height ratio so that it remains at 1:1.5. Obviously my input is only 300x200, but I think that I should be able to alter this by entering values in the Original res boxes, or by resizing the frame in the preview window. I don't do this just yet though!

- Next I save my settings by going to Setting>>Save (dropdown box). I save it as 3600x2400 so that I can recall it any time. So to recap, I've got 300x200 (1.5:1), 3600x2400 - all locked down. Scale reads 1200% for both x and y as it should. Perfect so far. Now saved these settings. Double check there's nothing funny going on by clicking on that saved setting. None of my inputs change - great!

- I click on the frame selector (in the Preview window) to select one of my six (neg) frames for a prescan and hit the prescan button. Image prescans. My settings are still the same.

- I now scan the frame using these exact inputs as a test. Remember I've got : 300x200 (1.5:1), 3600x2400 so in theory I should get a 3600x2400 image. No, I get a 2412x3618 image . Oh! Incedentally I've scanned a lot of frames like this - sometimes I get less than 2400x3600, which is really annoying if you want to print at 12x8. I don't want to have to interpolate up! I've got a 5400 optical res scanner! So in other words, what you see and what you expect are not the same as what you actually get.

- Anyway, I continue - the fact that I get the wrong sized output according to what it is telling me it is going to give is only part of the saga. Here is where I am unsure whether Silverfast has been correctly scoped. I think that when you select the frame and resize it using the handles, only the input res should change right? Well, I resize the frame to 400x267 input (that's 899.9% scale in both x and y). The output stays the same (3600x2400). Perfect it would appear. Just like it should work... Now then, as a test, as I'm not happy with my selection and I want to go back to my previously saved one, I select it from the menu.

I EXPECT to get one of two settings back:
- Either 300x200 input, 1200% scale, 3600x2400 output.
- OR 400x267 input, 899.9%, 3600x2400 output.
Why do I expect this? Because I scan a lot of film, I want to be able to store my resolution settings in the software and pull back my output res, along with the aspect ratio..

I GET back: 400x267 input, 1200% scale, 4801x3201 output!

Now that is just plain dumb! Surely the software should store the scale, and output (and perhaps even input, but that isn't really important). It looks like it stores ONLY the scale and picks up the input from the last frame setting before you click on a saved setting, then does the following: output = (original * scale) and thus gives an output that bears no resemblance to the one saved. (Incedentally I scan this and I get back 4824x3216! Umm is it me or does that not equal 4801x3201? Well I know I wanted 3600x2400 but that is besides the point and just highlights that WYSIWYG is just not the case with this software!






So, in summary:

1. - Silverfast says it is going to give me one output resolution, yet gives me another! Now to be honest that is totally useless to me. The Minolta software that came with my scanner gives me what it says it is going to give me 100% of the time. Silverfast should give me the same!

2. - I have an assumption about how Input, scale and output resolution should be set and recalled. It looks like Silverfast has been designed and coded in the following way:
- Set input, scale and output, lock and save. When recalled, software sets scale to whatever you had before, but takes input resolution from the dimensions of the frame rectangle in the preview window (or the input boxes) that were specified in the preceding scan, then calculates (or I think DICTATES is a better word) what OUTPUT res should be.

Now I just think this is either a) WRONG and someone has coded it incorrectly or b) a bad methodology.

I think that when you set your resolution and scale, you should be able to save that FINAL OUTPUT RES as a setting, then when you recall it, Silverfast should populate the Scale and Output boxes with whatever you saved and leave the input res boxes to whatever the last frame was. This is important for photography because as a photographer I want to make prints at a specific size. Software should allow me to store this final size, not dicate it to me based on input and scale - that's just the wrong way around in my view!





This is a really long post - apologies, but I've tried to be as scientific as possible with my testing and write-up. Hopefully someone can read this and either correct Silverfast Ai, or tell me where I'm going wrong. I think I have a logical arguement here for my second summing up point - even if someone dreamt up the really strange functionality that exists now, is there any chance of getting my functionality that is based on final output size built as an option into Silverfast? As for my first summary point, well that just needs fixing!

Hey robbrown99,

Do you have the output size set to accept inches, centimeters, pica, point, or pixel? I have mine set to inches and that allows me to simply specify 8X12, 5X7, 4X6 etc. I have found that the sizes are off a little some times because when I select the area of the slide/negative/picture there may be portions excluded.

Hi RAG,

I set the output measurement set to pixels usually and for the test I did it was set like this. I've also used inches instead like you've mentioned and got the same problems. I know what you mean about portions being excluded - I always have to crop the frame - even if I'm using the negative carrier rather than a slide (which crops the 35mm frame by its very nature).

But anyway, even if I do select the following inputs: 300x200 (quite a big crop!) with 1200% scale and 12x8 inch output (@300dpi) I would expect to get back an image that is EXACTLY 3600x2400. I don't get this back as the final image resolution which is really infuriating especially when my free minolta software can do that no problem! Even if I enter 3600x2400 I don't get it. This is all explained in my previous post.

As for the recall of previously saved settings, I think that Silverfast has been programmed (rightly or wrongly) incorrectly - I think that OUTPUT res and the aspect ratio are the defining factors. To use some terms, when you save output resolution and the aspect ratio (e.g. 1:1.5 for 35mm, or 1:1 for 6x6cm) these two values should be stored as CONSTANTS. Input resolution would therefore be a VARIABLE value which can be altered according to the photographer's desire to crop an image at will but still end up with the same OUTPUT RESOLUTION. By the way, Minolta software allows you to define this as an option and save it in a text file for recalling - simple idea and it works. I want Silverfast to do the same (Nikon Coolscan software allows you to do this too!)

Can someone from Silverfast prove or disprove my theory? I have written detail on the way in which I think the formula has been programmed into Silverfast below - mainly for the Silverfast team who are now testing my problem.

In summary:

Silverfast's Current Method (I think and may be wrong here)!
OUTPUT RES (Variable) = INPUT RES (Variable?) * SCALE (Constant?)
(aspect ratio = constant)


The way I think it should be working:
INPUT RES (Variable) = OUTPUT RES (Constant) / SCALE (Variable)
(aspect ratio = constant)



Testing team / Sonny, please read the detail below...Thanks for your help...


Rob



btw, below I mean VARIABLE in the sense of the fact that that a saved value can be altered. You can of course store constants in a variable in a program - you just don't change it.
--------------------
Silverfast's Current Method (I think and may be wrong here)!

OUTPUT RES (Variable) = INPUT RES (Variable?) * SCALE (Constant?)
(aspect ratio = constant)

When you resize the frame, the inputs change and output stays the same. However, when you next recall the saved setting (300x200, 1200%, 3600x2400), the output res in calculated based on the previous frame settings, rather than recalling the previous frame settings! Using the values from my previous post, if I resized my frame to 400x267, 899.9%, 3600x2400 and then recall my saved settings (Setting>>recall saved setting) Silverfast populates the boxes with:

x: 400 * 1200 scale = 4801 output x
y: 267 * 1200 scale = 3201 output y

So my assumption of the formula above is correct right? input res * scale = output res
where input res = from last frame setting, scale = stored in saved settings as a constant, output is a function of input * scale
So the working behind the formula is correct in Silverfast - I'm just arguing about the way it SHOULD WORK.


The way I think it should be working:

INPUT RES (Variable) = OUTPUT RES (Constant) / SCALE (Variable)
(aspect ratio = constant)

So, if we go back to my example: if I start out with 400x267, 899.9%, 3600x2400. I then go back to my saved setting (300x200, 3600x2400), I think Silverfast should do the following:

x: 3600 output / 899.9% = 400.0444494
y: 2400 output / 899.9% = 266.6962996

So, basically, input is a function of :
OUTPUT(CONSTANT and stored in the saved setting) / SCALE (VARIABLE and taken from the previous frame setting set manually just before the saved setting is recalled).

Does that make sense? My brain is starting to hurt now

---------------------