Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

View Poll Results: What is your favorite scanning software?
Vuescan 168 50.76%
Silverfast 67 20.24%
Epson Scan 65 19.64%
Other (please state) 31 9.37%
Voters: 331. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

What is your favorite scanning software?
Old 11-30-2012   #1
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
 
PatrickT's Avatar
 
PatrickT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 32
Posts: 797
What is your favorite scanning software?

As the title states...what is your favorite scanning software and (if you feel like it) why?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #2
PatrickT
New Rangefinder User
 
PatrickT's Avatar
 
PatrickT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 32
Posts: 797
I'll start...I don't like any of them, but if I had to choose one, it'd be Silverfast. I like the film profiles. I haven't played with Vuescan much, but I'm considering it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #3
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,686
Vuescan. I have a Nikon 8000ED scanner. There are three choices for scan software:

• Nikon Scan 4 came with it, but it is buggy and often crashes, and it is EXCRUCIATINGLY slow on Intel Macs.

• Silverfast. It costs over $500 for the Nikon 8000ED. No thanks.

• Vuescan. I have had it ten years with free upgrades for life. It never crashes, scans fast, gives great image quality, and was very reasonably priced. Only downside is the poor interface, but once you learn it, it gives incredible scans.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #4
fuji645
Registered User
 
fuji645 is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 125
Silverfast. I've also used ScanWizard Pro, a software packaged with my Microtek Scanmaker i900. Downloaded trial version of Vuescan--wasn't impressed. Silverfast gives me the most control and best results of all of them.
__________________
Fuji GS 645, Nettar 6x6, Kiev III and a bunch of other stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #5
literiter
Registered User
 
literiter's Avatar
 
literiter is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canadian Rockies
Posts: 1,210
Nikon Scan came with my CS9000. My first few months with the program was an exercise in frustration.

Now I understand it and it works very well. I have tried Vuescan and find it easy to use but not very versatile.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #6
Dana B.
Registered User
 
Dana B. is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 217
Prefer Epson. Vuescan was very poor for B&W.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-30-2012   #7
daveywaugh
Blah
 
daveywaugh's Avatar
 
daveywaugh is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 349
I think I'll have to say Epson scan (although I no longer use Epsons) because I love its simplicity and the fact that most functions and terminology mirror PhotoShop's. I detest the way that both Silverfast and Vuescan are just so different. PS is a 'standard' of sorts. Even proprietary software I used in the 80s and 90s for drum scanners were more 'consistent' and PhotoShop-like (even before it was released :-)

I'd like to give Vuescan the vote for its continuing support of most scanners. Customer support is pretty non-existent IMO (well I've had no replies to numerous emails or tweets). Still it deserves its support.

Silverfast is fiddly and inconsistent but ultimately can deliver exceptional results.

That's my 2c.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #8
MT4
Registered User
 
MT4 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 24
My experience is quite similar to Paul description. CS 9000 Nikon software works for me best.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #9
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 37
Posts: 3,823
Vuescan. Silverfast seems good, but I never got the hang of it. Epson Scan came with my V700 and whilst I got great results once, it never really seemed to work after that. Vuescan worked perfectly with my Canon FS4000, and the V700.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #10
Mablo
Registered User
 
Mablo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,940
I have Vuescan, Silverfast and Canoscan. Vuescan is my favorite at the moment.
__________________
Mablo
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #11
ruby.monkey
Registered User
 
ruby.monkey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Garden of England
Age: 47
Posts: 4,051
Vuescan. It's capable and it works on Linux - both very important pluses. Having said that, I tend to avoid scanning colour negatives since I find getting the final colours right to be an utter pain in the bum.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #12
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,535
They all suck. I use EpsonScan as it has been the least buggy of the ones I've tried. But is it really necessary to design a software that uses multiple windows for something that should be in one? Click in the window, click the button in the window, click into the next window, click the button in that window, click back to the first window, click to scan. click "Yes, really, I meant to click that"...

And then separate windows for adjustments?
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #13
vitaly66
Registered User
 
vitaly66 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 74
Xsane: works well with my epson scanner and integrates perfectly with the gimp.
__________________
Vitaly
incidence: a journal of light falling
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #14
ianstamatic
Registered User
 
ianstamatic's Avatar
 
ianstamatic is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 315
Drum = Aztec DPL Pro

For the drum scanner i tried everything and DPL has no equal.

Epson v700 = epson software
__________________


My site

My Blog
My Instagram


Rollei 2.8E, II and Vb, Autocord, Ricoh Diacord +225, Ikoflex
Leica M3 x2 + CL, Contax G1 +28 +45 +90, Rollei 35s, Nikon F3, Lynx 14, Oly OM1, 35RC, 35SP,Konica EE, S2
Fuji gs645 folder +645W, Agfa Isolette's J,I, III, Iskra x2, Welta Waltur x2, Zenobia x3, Super Ikonta 532/16, ZI Nettar
Mamiya RZ Pro x2 bods, 50, 65, 110, 180, 240
Crown Graphic, Toyo 45a : 75 + 90 + 120 +135 +150 + 203 + 210 + 240
PhotoTherm SSK-8R, Aztec Drum Scanner
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #15
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Vuescan. . . .

• Vuescan. I have had it ten years with free upgrades for life. It never crashes, scans fast, gives great image quality, and was very reasonably priced. Only downside is the poor interface, but once you learn it, it gives incredible scans.
Chris: I have just started using Vuescan with Nikon scanners. Care to share your preferred method for scanning BW negs (e.g. Tri-x)? Any benefit to scanning as a 16-bit color negative and then gradually subtracting information until you have what you like?

Ben Marks
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #16
Rogier
Rogier Willems
 
Rogier's Avatar
 
Rogier is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 1,185
Chris: create a video tutorial. Will be happy to buy it from you!
__________________
Smiles across the wires,


Rogier Willems


http://www.flickr.com/photos/rogierwillems/

http://www.scooter-it.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #17
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,505
At this point the poll confirms my View that ViewScan is easily twice as good as Silverfast.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #18
Photo_Smith
Registered User
 
Photo_Smith's Avatar
 
Photo_Smith is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,480
I use them all. Epson scan is good for what it does and is simple to use; perhaps a little noisy with colour but very good for a freebie included with hardware. Vuescan is great but too complex for casual users, has excellent output and DNG to Photoshop capability. Vuescan works with all your scanners the ones you own, will own and is free upgrades forever, meaning if you are serious at scanning is a huge plus point.
Silverfast is an amazing piece of software too, probably gives as good or better results as Vuescan especially with the wonderful canned profiles which for me give easier results especially with harder to scan emulsions. the learning curve is steep with Silverfast and Vuescan but Silverfast is more logical and marginally better especially with respect to noise in the blue channel.
It's biggest drawback is compared to Vuescan is being tied to one scanner and it's cost so despite being a better program is harder to recommend.

For me is can be summed up thus:

Epson Scan—for beginners and occasional scans, very capable

Vuescan—for those with time to learn and master, who may have more than one scanner or upgrade and want to keep the software.

Silverfast—an excellent software capable of peerless results with difficult to scan films but expensive and tied to one scanner.

I use Silverfast for scan to print, but Epson scan for everyday web scans, Vuescan on my Minolta Dimage when I scan 35mm.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #19
Jerry1963
Registered User
 
Jerry1963 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 24
I bought silverfast for a Reflecta Crystalscan 7200 for mac. The software reminded me of something designed in the early 80's, but it did work, although it was always a bit tempermental.

When Apple bought out OS Lion suddenly the silverfast software would not work due to Apple's change of architecture. Now Apple release developers version of software months in advance, but silverfast never bothered to contact customers to advise there may be an issue with compatibility. I had only had the software for about 6 months and it took Silverfast about another 8 months to state they were releasing a new version of software that would work with the 7200.

So having paid a considable sum of money for the original version, I had 8 months of a non-working scanner.

Silverfast then had the cheek to ask for €20 for the upgrade to the new version. I downloaded the trial, and guess what... It did not work!!

I would not buy from Silverfast ever again... Rubbish company and rubbish service.

Last edited by Jerry1963 : 12-01-2012 at 07:47. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #20
Nikos72
Registered User
 
Nikos72's Avatar
 
Nikos72 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Athens, Greece
Age: 44
Posts: 1,058
Vuescan is my favourite. It gives you plenty of options and you always get the expected result.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #21
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 45
Posts: 1,243
I have a V700 and use Epson scan. Excellent results for a flatbed. I thought about getting Vuescan but no point putting lipstick on a donkey.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #22
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,734
Been using VueScan for 13 years. It does a great job.
  Reply With Quote

EDIT 1-11-2014.... Epson Scan
Old 12-01-2012   #23
DNG
Film Friendly
 
DNG's Avatar
 
DNG is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Camby, Indiana. USA
Age: 63
Posts: 2,956
EDIT 1-11-2014.... Epson Scan

Use Silverfast 8/64bit with my Plustek 7300.... But, I may upgrade to the Plustek 8300 Scanner... It has built-in 64bit drivers for the hardware

It a good program... BUT, they changed how the "Preview" works for the Sharping tool...
  • Old) Scans a very small area to see the effects, takes about 15s tops.
  • New) Has to scan the whole Negative/Slide before you can judge the effect... over 3min in most cases
I prefer the old software (V-6) sharpening preview over the new preview as far as the time required to see the effects.
But I prefer the Newer GUI of V-8 over V-6.

EDIT: 01-11-2014

I now use Epson Scan with my Epson V700...
Simple to use
Plenty of pre-scan adjustments
Excellent with B&W negatives in 16bit gray scale
Love the "Load it and leave it" auto framing carriers..

Scan time is fast enough at 3200dpi.. but, I can load 24 negatives (4 rows of 6), make a few adjustments for each frame, Scan, and walk away, to do something else if I need to.
__________________
Feedback Link
Flickr: My Street
Other Gallories
Nikon: F2, FM2n, EM, Konica FS-1, Fuji X100T
Nikkor: 24mm f/2.8 Ais, 28mm f/3.5 Ai, 50mm f/1.4 N/Ai
Hexanon: 40mm f/1.8 AR, 57mm f/1.2 AR
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #24
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,251
In most cases, the software supplied with higher end scanners does a pretty good job without much effort.

I do appreciate that Vuescan and Silverfast support scanners on OSes never supported by the original makers and improve on the mediocre film scan results the original software for consumer flatbeds tend to deliver. But both need far more attention (and have a higher potential for disasters) than the original software for my scanners, whether Nikon or Linotype...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #25
gustavoAvila
Registered User
 
gustavoAvila is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 135
Having used NikonScan, EpsonScan, various evaluation versions of SilverFast, my favorite scanning software is Vuescan Professional.

The problem with scanning, is that novice users expect perfection straight out of the scanner, this is rarely achieved.

There are simply too many variables (dye fading, white balance, over/under exposure, poor development, etc, etc) that cannot be compensated for using canned profiles. (This is especially true for color negatives.)

As such, post-processing scanned images (using a competent photo editor) is non-optional.

The beauty of Vuescan is that it is extremely easy to generate an image that is amenable to the post-processing step.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #26
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
Chris: I have just started using Vuescan with Nikon scanners. Care to share your preferred method for scanning BW negs (e.g. Tri-x)? Any benefit to scanning as a 16-bit color negative and then gradually subtracting information until you have what you like?

Ben Marks
Ben, here's a tutorial on my website that explains step by step how I scan with Vuescan and my Nikon 8000ED.

There is no benefit to scanning a black and white film in color, all it does is make the file three times larger. Scan in 16 bit grayscale. The scan will look pretty flat and lifeless, because the scanner's dynamic range is optimized for scanning slides, but this is good....it makes it easier to extract detail from very contrasty images. You'll have to do some curves adjustments in Photoshop to bring out the tonality. The tutorial on my site shows examples.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #27
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 73
Posts: 3,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Marks View Post
............... Any benefit to scanning as a 16-bit color negative and then gradually subtracting information until you have what you like?
Ben: remember that your scanner hardware will always scan a red channel, a blue channel and a green channel no matter what settings your scanner driver (i.e. Vuescan) is at. With a b&w neg, these channels are similar because there is no color data. This unmanipulated data is transferred back to the scanner driver in the CPU.

Your scanner driver can either output each of these similar channels as an RGB file or merge them into a grayscale file for output. Vuescan weights the merge in favor of the green channel which typically is cleaner. The primary difference is the RGB file is 3X the size but contains no more useful data. Sometimes this is referred to as a 48 bit file vs. a 16 bit file.

The old urban legend that "scanning as a color file gives more data" just does not hold up. It only gives you a bigger file.

BTW same applies to scanning as a positive vs. negative as all the scanner really does is shine light through the film and measure shadows on the other side. It does not know nor care if it shining a light through a positiver or negative. Some of the old scanner drivers did a better job converting and outputting a file as a negative or positive but Vuescan does both with the same level of precision.

Lastly, Chris' point about the best scans looking crappy right out of the scanner is critical. Too many people still err is evaluating the quality of the scan file with how good it looks right out of the scanner and not the final output.
__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #28
MikeL
Go Fish
 
MikeL's Avatar
 
MikeL is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,130
Nice post Bob. I doubt the myths/gospel of "scan as a positive and invert" or "scan as a color negative and modify to black and white" will ever go away, but your post may decrease the time and harddrive space wasted by some.

I wasted time trying both, but from comparisons, it was clear the data wasn't that different, the files just looked different. Files from the mythical approaches, once adjusted, yielded similar images, but required more steps and manipulation. The extra steps may have yielded better files, but that could be due to the inherent need for extra processing, which almost all files benefit from, whatever way you scan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #29
MikeL
Go Fish
 
MikeL's Avatar
 
MikeL is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,130
As to the original question, Nikonscan on a Coolscan 9000 has been rock-solid on my Macs for the all the years I've had it.

I did have problems with a Coolscan 5000, that I initially thought was a Nikonscan problem, but after trying on different computers, it was clear that it was a USB-related problem. Once I had it hooked up to a Mac with a stable USB setup, it was rock-solid too.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #30
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,973
For Coolscan 5000: Silverfast. The IR channel when using VueScan is effectively useless.

I still manage to use the Nikon Scan software with Windoze 7 64-bit.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #31
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickjames View Post
There are a few misleading statements in this thread. If you want the best final image quality it pays to take the time and get the scan as close to what you want without dumping any tonality at the ends. Making flat scans is okay (or even desired) for proof scans, but leaves a little to be desired for final scans, especially if there is going to be manipulation of the image.

Scanning a black and white neg as a color neg or transparency doesn't get you "more information", BUT it does let you choose the color channel your image comes from. All color channels are not equal. If the software you are using "averages" the channels to make a greyscale you are not getting optimal quality. Scanning in RGB lets you choose the sharpest channel. Vuescan has this facility built in so you can go straight to greyscale choosing whatever channel you prefer.

Completely agree. But nuances and details don't make it on Google searches; it's "best software ever" where it's at, and you won't convince those who get Good-Enough results otherwise.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #32
Lawrence A.
Registered User
 
Lawrence A. is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 93
I use the Nikon Scan with my Coolscan 9000. I bought Vuescan with the lifetime upgrades, but I find the interface confusing, so I haven't used it. I'll have to, though, once my XP machine dies and I have to scan with a later version of Windows.

I scan my black and white in color because doing it in gray scale yields terrible results.
__________________
Du noir s'en vient
Le clair qu'il a.

Guillevic
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #33
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawrence A. View Post
I use the Nikon Scan with my Coolscan 9000. I bought Vuescan with the lifetime upgrades, but I find the interface confusing, so I haven't used it. I'll have to, though, once my XP machine dies and I have to scan with a later version of Windows.
Well, you'll have some amount of time, then. Nikon Scan works nicely in Win7/8 with the generic SCSI driver supplied with Vuescan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #34
cabbiinc
Slightly Irregular
 
cabbiinc is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 235
http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc21.htm#topic18

Quote:
Scanning Black/White Negative Film

If you're scanning black/white negative film, first check to see if the film looks gray or orange to the naked eye. If it looks gray, set Input | Media to "B/W negative" and if it looks orange, set it to "Color negative". Then go to the Color tab and choose a Black/White film type. If you can't find a film type that exactly matches the film you're using, experiment with the Kodak T-Max settings.
On most scanners, setting Input | Media to "Color negative" will increase the green exposure time by 2.5x and the blue exposure time by 3.5x. This results in adjusting for the green and blue absorption by the orange mask of the film. If the film doesn't have an orange mask, then using "Color negative" will result in a raw scan file that looks very cyan.
There's a little truth in both ways. I've always had better luck with just scanning black and white as black and white though. I usually shoot T-Max, so maybe that's just the best setting for the film I shoot.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #35
Peter^
Registered User
 
Peter^'s Avatar
 
Peter^ is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 264
I'm not going to vote here. I use silverfast, but would never endorse it. The results are probably about as good as you can get, but the user interface is just awful. I was hoping version 8 would be better, but no it was just different. Another steep learning curve.
__________________
- Peter
----------------
Zeiss Ikon, Olympus OM-1n, Konica C35, NEX-7

See my pictures at:
http://peter.andrews.ipernity.com

“Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #36
gustavoAvila
Registered User
 
gustavoAvila is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel M.A. View Post
For Coolscan 5000: Silverfast. The IR channel when using VueScan is effectively useless.

I still manage to use the Nikon Scan software with Windoze 7 64-bit.
Actually, the Vuescan IR channel works very well (though like most things in life, it is best used in moderation).

It is true that the IR cleaning in earlier versions of Vuescan was not as effect as that in NikonScan, but this was resolved long ago.

Vuescan is actively supported by it's developer so what was true yesterday may not necessarily be true tomorrow. NikonScan on the other hand..., well, lets not even go there!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #37
NeeZee
Registered User
 
NeeZee is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Age: 38
Posts: 554
I use epson scan for 'digital contacts' and web use with my V700 as it's pretty easy to use for batch scanning. For rescans of colour negatives I want to print I use Silverfast SE because of the film profiles which can really help getting the best out of the negs. My Silverfast version is not very stable i.e. crashes sometimes, though.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #38
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 41
Posts: 7,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickjames View Post
There are a few misleading statements in this thread. If you want the best final image quality it pays to take the time and get the scan as close to what you want without dumping any tonality at the ends. Making flat scans is okay (or even desired) for proof scans, but leaves a little to be desired for final scans, especially if there is going to be manipulation of the image.

Absolutely false. The scans come out flat, whether you like it or not. That's how the hardware works. No software can change that. Applying adjustments in the scan software does the exact same thing as applying them in photoshop, except Photoshop allows more precise and extensive controls.
__________________
Christopher Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana

Back home again in Indiana

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com

My Technical Info pages: Film Developing times, scanning, printing, editing.

Buy My Prints in RFF Classifieds

Support My Work on Patreon
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #39
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 73
Posts: 3,390
Chris is 100% correct. The actual data that comes out of your scanner hardware is the same no matter what you do. You cannot change it. Everything else is software adjustments of the raw scan data. You are better doing those adjustments in your image editor where you can see what you are doing than even controllable scanner software such a Vuescan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickjames
There are a few misleading statements in this thread. If you want the best final image quality it pays to take the time and get the scan as close to what you want without dumping any tonality at the ends. Making flat scans is okay (or even desired) for proof scans, but leaves a little to be desired for final scans, especially if there is going to be manipulation of the image.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
Absolutely false. The scans come out flat, whether you like it or not. That's how the hardware works. No software can change that. Applying adjustments in the scan software does the exact same thing as applying them in photoshop, except Photoshop allows more precise and extensive controls.
__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2012   #40
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post

There is no benefit to scanning a black and white film in color, all it does is make the file three times larger. Scan in 16 bit grayscale....ave to do some curves adjustments in Photoshop to bring out the tonality. The tutorial on my site shows examples.
Thanks Chris, I will check it out.
__________________
Benjamin’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:59.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.