Minolta Scan Dual III

rondo

Member
I am interested in hearing user reports about the new Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III film and slide scanner. The price is right, but I wonder just how good is the quality of prints that are made with the scans from this machine. One could spend a lot more money on a scanner. Does more money really always mean better quality? Minolta claims it will make a 31 mb file at 2820 dpi resolution. Just how big of an enlargement will this make and still show the quality of Zeiss?

Ron in New Mexico
 

rnk

Member
Ron, I have this scanner and I am very happy with it, but you need to be willing to accept that a 2820dpi scanner is not going to give enough resolution to *really* show off your glass. If that's your criteria, you need to be looking at the 4000 to 5000dpi scanners. Minolta has just announced a new 35mm scanner with 5400dpi resolution retailing for around $1100 that you might want to wait for. But if you need to stay in the less than $500 range, the scandual III is the best in that class. I bought mine from Amazon for $275 which I think is an incredible value.

I get excellent prints up to about 8"x12" size, and can go up to 12"x18" in a pinch , but detail does begin to soften significantly at this larger size. Prints sized at 10"x6.7" look razor sharp printed on my Epson 870 printer. I should also mention that I use Ed Hamrick's Vuescan software. It is much better than the Minolta scanner software IMO. I also generally apply an edge-sharpening unsharp mask action I bought for a few dollars from Fred Miranda (works much better than just applying photoshop's unsharp mask alone).

I hope this helps.

Bob Kramer

Posted by Ron Walton on Wednesday, May 21, 2003 - 7:14 pm:

I am interested in hearing user reports about the new Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III film and slide scanner. The price is right, but I wonder just how good is the quality of prints that are made with the scans from this machine. One could spend a lot more money on a scanner. Does more money really always mean better quality? Minolta claims it will make a 31 mb file at 2820 dpi resolution. Just how big of an enlargement will this make and still show the quality of Zeiss?
 

coyot

Well-Known Member
>Would you please explain Photoshop's unmask? I use the sharpen filter in PS 7.0, and have heard of the unsharp (which is suppose to sharpen???) but as a Photshop novice am just learning. Would you please explain the difference between sharp and unsharp mask?

Thanks.

michael.
 

rnk

Member
>Would you please explain Photoshop's unmask?

You will get MUCH better results using the unsharp mask filter. I know the filter name is counter-intuitive, but the term relates back to a wet darkroom process of the same name. You need to be careful with the various setting options when using unsharp mask or you can start to see nasty artifacts like halos around edges in the image. As a rough start, I would suggest the following settings:

Amount: 40% to 80% Radius: 0.5 to 0.7 pixels Threshold: 0

Increase the radius and the amount too much, and you will see those over-sharpening artifacts real quick. Check out this link to a nice article on sharpening in Photoshop:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The beauty of Fred Miranda's plug-in action is that it creates a mask so you only sharpen the edges of picture elements, without sharpening the grain structure in areas of the image that don't benefit from sharpening, like skin tones or sky. I highly recommend it. Here's the link:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Choose the "Essential Digital Darkroom" category, then look for the FM Edge Sharpen PRO action. This is a really neat little action that I use all the time.

My apologies to the list if this is drifting off topic, but I've found it to be essential stuff for getting the digital best from that sweet little sonnar on my Contax T! :)

Bob Kramer
 
O

ou1954

> >Would you please explain Photoshop's unmask? > >You will get MUCH better results using the unsharp mask filter. I know >the filter name is counter-intuitive, but the term relates back to a >wet darkroom process of the same name. You need to be careful with the >various setting options when using unsharp mask or you can start to >see nasty artifacts like halos around edges in the image. As a rough >start, I would suggest the following settings: > >Amount: 40% to 80% Radius: 0.5 to 0.7 pixels Threshold: 0 > >Increase the radius and the amount too much, and you will see those >over-sharpening artifacts real quick. Check out this link to a nice >article on sharpening in Photoshop: > >
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
> >The beauty of Fred Miranda's plug-in action is that it creates a mask >so you only sharpen the edges of picture elements, without sharpening >the grain structure in areas of the image that don't benefit from >sharpening, like skin tones or sky. I highly recommend it. Here's the >link: > >
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
> >Choose the "Essential Digital Darkroom" category, then look for the FM >Edge Sharpen PRO action. This is a really neat little action that I >use all the time. > >My apologies to the list if this is drifting off topic, but I've found >it to be essential stuff for getting the digital best from that sweet >little sonnar on my Contax T! :) > >Bob Kramer

I got the impression that the unsharp mask was intended to help fix up re-s&led images.

Guess that part of the help system of PhotoShop is just not very clear.

DAW
 

swoolf

Well-Known Member
> I got the impression that the unsharp mask was intended to help fix up> re-s&led images.

No , its meant to sharpen images - the term is actually from the printing trade . The experts all agree its best to leave this step till last i.e. after any other adjustments you may make in Photoshop . Steve
 
Top