Richard - thanks for the suggestion/feedback.
The ED4000's embedded profile is labeled "Nikon Adobe v220.127.116.1100" and seems
equivalent to Adobe 98. I say this because when I open a raw ED4000 image
in Photoshop it doesn't complain that it differs from my working space,
Adobe 98. Photoshop recognizes the SS4000's raw profile "Polaroid CS4000
16-bit: Color Slide" as different from Adobe 98 and gives me the normal
Profile Conversion dialog.
How about if I put a couple of the raw scans on the website, in their
original profiles? It sounds like you would like the full Q60 image done
this way so that you can check the gamat. So that's what I'll put out there
in the next hour so so.
[mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Richard N. Moyer
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Polaroid SS4000 vs Nikon ED4000 comparison
This was a very well done comparison test. I have several comments,
and a suggestion:
It would seem that the SS4000 outperformed the ED4000 in shadow detail.
The ED4000 seems to have outperformed the SS4000 by capturing a
greater portion of the Q60 E6 target gamut. (see plots sent directly
Regarding the capture of colors. Your jpgs of the Q60 target use
AdobeRGB as the embedded ICC profile. I am wondering if you used this
profile in the actual scan. You will note in the two pictures I sent
you direct (40kb each) that each of the two scans seems bounded by
the AdobeRGB profile perimeter in certain regions, as viewed in a 2D
L.a.b. plot. Since Ektachrome is a wide gamut film media, I am
wondering if you wouldn't mind scanning using EktaspaceRGB, which,
according to J. Homes, bounds the E6 gamut like a tight glove - no
more, no less. EktaSpaceRGB is a broader gamut space than AdobeRGB,
which is evident in the two plots. It may turn out that the potential
gamut latitude of each scanner was limited, or clipped by the use of
In any case, it seems that the ED4000 capture of the target gamut was
broader in all regions, except possibly the yellow area.
>I am been very pleased with my Polaroid SS4000 scanner over the past year,
>but have been suffering some scanner envy when reading about the new Nikon
>ED4000 scanner's advertised improved dynamic range and ICE dust removal.
>Therefore I performed some tests to compare the two scanners in an attempt
>to validate the ED4000's hype (and my envy). The tests and their results
>can be seen at http://www.samcos.com/rick/equip/scannertest/ssvsed.htm