Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

leejo.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#41

Post by lostlogin »

metadat wrote: post #7
lepouet wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to own the scan he is talking about and various epson scanner, you cannot imagine the difference, Epson is fine and you are happy with it, then you see what an Hasselblad scanner can do for the same negative and for the rest of yout life you will think that Epsons are garbage. I "used" to own it because it had some small hardware problems and i was unable to fix it or find someone who could repair it. I bought…

What is a "digital back"? Edit: Wow! Thanks for all your replies! This sounds intriguing, but only tangentially related to scanning. Now if you could turn a film camera into a high-quality scanner.. wouldn't that be something :) I'm in the ignorant camp where I've been satisfied with Epson consumer grade scanners because I had no idea what I was missing. Cheers.

> I've been satisfied with Epson consumer grade scanners because I had no idea what I was missing.

Every time I meet someone who is expert in something I enjoy I have learned to tread carefully. It can often ruin perceptions - sure, it leads to a better result but it’s often very pricey.

Coffee, computers, networking, storage, backups, automation, tools, etc etc.

My life is a lot better and things a lot more reliable for the help I’ve had, but I’m poorer.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#42

Post by manuelabeledo »

yellowapple wrote: post #39

> I partially agree - but without the patent system where does the incentive for companies to invest millions (sometimes billions) into research and development come from? Altruism? This presupposes that the patented invention is trivial to reproduce by mere knowledge of its existence - in which case, is that really the best use of a patent system? Most worthwhile inventions can't be easily duplicated like that; the…

> This presupposes that the patented invention is trivial to reproduce by mere knowledge of its existence - in which case, is that really the best use of a patent system?

This seems to be the central issue with many software patents, where the "invention" is either generic, obvious, or already widespread.

Take the whole set of patents covering touch screen interactions, for instance. Apple sued HTC for several patent infringements and lost, because the judge deemed things like scrolling through pictures "too obvious". The case covered four patents, as far as I remember. Apple also sued Samsung for the "slide to unlock" patent, and won, not because Samsung copied Apple, but because Apple held the patent, and it was considered valid.

Thus, there is no room for any sort of simultaneous inventions here. Samsung might have come up with the idea by themselves. Apple might have patented a concept that was used by others first. And the reason why a single company was awarded exclusive ownership over it, was timing and money, nothing else.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#43

Post by DiabloD3 »

Const-me wrote: post #33
Aloha wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Vuescan support it?

Never heard of that software. Indeed, it says “VueScan is compatible on Windows, macOS and Linux.” Thanks for the tip! Will give it a try next time I need to scan something.

VueScan is really really huge in the photog community for those who still have to handle (or restore) film negatives. Not only does it continue to support scanners that have long since been abandoned by their manufacturers, its just straight up better software.

I've used it for shits and giggles, and it even did quality work on a generic Epson flatbed better and faster (and lets face it, Epson flatbeds aren't good, getting anything good out of them is very difficult).

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#44

Post by dTal »

So, I missed the suggestion thread, but here's mine: hack together a DIY microscope scanning rig. It'll set you back less than 500 dollars. An open frame 3D printer like a Creality CR-10S can be had for a few hundred - that's your stage, complete with controller electronics. Replace the hotend with a bracket for a Pi Cam HQ - it's a decent 12MP sensor - and add a microscope lens [0]. Put a lightbox on the bed, then your film, then the thinnest piece of glass you can find to hold it down. Now you can easily raster-scan at over 17000dpi. You can even make minute depth adjustments using the vertical axis of the stage to correct for film flatness issues.

I'm sure there are many objections to this setup - I know resolution isn't everything and I'm unsure if a Sony IMX477 sensor is "good enough" for the author in terms of color and dynamic range - but you can't argue with the price!

[0]https://shop.pimoroni.com/products/microscope-lens-0-12-1-8x...

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#45

Post by [deleted] »

yieldcrv wrote: post #35

> if you patent something and don’t act on it in X years then it enters the public domain. If you discontinue the thing that relies on the patent then it enters the public domain. And so on. people have an extremely limited view of patents to suggest this. so you're working a 9-5, spent all of your savings on getting a patent because you did perceive something everyone else neglected, and people on the internet are l…

[deleted]

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#46

Post by Aloha »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #43
Const-me wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never heard of that software. Indeed, it says “VueScan is compatible on Windows, macOS and Linux.” Thanks for the tip! Will give it a try next time I need to scan something.

VueScan is really really huge in the photog community for those who still have to handle (or restore) film negatives. Not only does it continue to support scanners that have long since been abandoned by their manufacturers, its just straight up better software. I've used it for shits and giggles, and it even did quality work on a generic Epson flatbed better and faster (and lets face it, Epson flatbeds aren't good, g…

VueScan is amazing, and the author is a great guy who does most of his own support.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#47

Post by bsder »

bombcar wrote: post #6

Often commercial software has tons of closed-source libraries that they don’t have the source code to. Even Doom had that when opensourced. It’s an annoying headache for a company to open source even for a project no longer in development.

In this instance, though, the protocol is more valuable than the software.

If they released documentation on the Firewire protocol, likely somebody could write the software to talk to it fairly quickly. Hardware protocols are almost always the simplest thing that could possibly work--and generally simpler than that. As one myself, I assure you that hardware people are LAZY. :)

(In reality, the issue is that hardware is really difficult to change and expensive to develop. Consequently, you want your hardware to be simple and robust while pushing as much complexity as you can up to the software stack.)

Or, even more importantly, if they released some schematics and documentation, that Firewire port could be replaced by an Ethernet port.

The sticking point is likely the word "documentation". I suspect that "documentation" doesn't exist anymore--if it ever did.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#48

Post by solarmist »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #42
yellowapple wrote: post #39

> I partially agree - but without the patent system where does the incentive for companies to invest millions (sometimes billions) into research and development come from? Altruism? This presupposes that the patented invention is trivial to reproduce by mere knowledge of its existence - in which case, is that really the best use of a patent system? Most worthwhile inventions can't be easily duplicated like that; the…

> This presupposes that the patented invention is trivial to reproduce by mere knowledge of its existence - in which case, is that really the best use of a patent system? This seems to be the central issue with many software patents, where the "invention" is either generic, obvious, or already widespread. Take the whole set of patents covering touch screen interactions, for instance. Apple sued HTC for several patent…

The upside is the patent system hasn’t been fucked up like the copyright system, so after 15 years all the really obvious patents start expiring.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#49

Post by yellowapple »

solarmist wrote: post #48
manuelabeledo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This presupposes that the patented invention is trivial to reproduce by mere knowledge of its existence - in which case, is that really the best use of a patent system? This seems to be the central issue with many software patents, where the "invention" is either generic, obvious, or already widespread. Take the whole set of patents covering touch screen interactions, for instance. Apple sued HTC for several patent…

The upside is the patent system hasn’t been fucked up like the copyright system, so after 15 years all the really obvious patents start expiring.

Yeah, if the copyright system was brought back to the same state as the patent system, then that'd be a strict improvement - though that's less due to the current patent system being decent and more due to the copyright system being obnoxiously bad.

Re: Responses to “I Almost Bought a Scanner”

#50

Post by dirtyid »

derefr wrote: post #25
aeturnum wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure? Maybe? Do you have a working setup? When you get down to it - a scanner is "just" a really specific digital camera with a film holder. The problem is that quality is more about setting up the entire system consistently (film aligned on the scanning camera focal plane correctly, can shift from frame to frame, etc). As with all photographic setups, the chain is only as good as its weakest link. It is probably pos…

I guess what I would naively expect to exist here, is some kind of "kit" for turning a DSLR into a 2D flatbed raster scanner, in the vein of the Pi-based emulation portable "kits" — i.e. "here's a box with all the mechanical and structural stuff, flat-packed with foolproof assembly mechanisms that guarantee rigidity; just bring-your-own expensive electronic bit to slot into it, and watch it go." Where in this case th…

Friend built a light box with some color calibration markers and DSLRed 20,000 slides in a few days and post processed the ones he liked. It's not professional grade but it worked fine.
Post reply on HN