Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand transparencies to scan...

["Jules" <jules@popmonkey.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Sleep" <TonySleep@halftone.co.uk>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2001 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: You have several hundred thousand
transparencies to scan...


> On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 06:40:38 -0500  Tom Scales (tscales@attglobal.net)
> wrote:
>
> > Shoot, I've never seen one, but it seems like the Nikon 4000 ED with
the
> > optional slide feeder would be perfect. 36 shots at a time.
>
> Doubtful - it will be extremely slow compared to bulk scanning
stations
> which process slides in a matter of seconds each.
>
> Does anyone know if, with the LS4000 feeder, Nikon have finally got
around
> to fixing the notorious jamming/misfeed problems which affected the
> hoppers for both the LS1000 & LS2000? Or whether they've improved
their
> idea of autoexposure ( on previous models: work out the exposure for
the
> first slide in the hopper and then assume all the rest are identical)?
> Probably not, as I don't expect the '4000 hopper is being distributed
yet.

i find my SF-200 (LS-2000 slide feeder) to be foolproof, but it took me
a long time to get it that way.  the primary reason for jams is the
mount being too rough surfaced or placed incorrectly causing two slides
to be fed into the scanner at a time.  i found, for example, that one
particular type of plastic mount (i forget the brand) would work fine in
one direction, but would cause jams in another (you can test this by
putting two slides together and sliding them around.  if they can slide
to the right, that's how you put them in).  the mounts i use now, thin
gepe when machine mounted, the thicker ones when hand mounting (the
thicker the mount the less jams you'll get) work exceptionally well.  i
haven't experienced a jam in over a year (at least a thousand scans and
all in the feeder).

~j