Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Vuescan question



I was in the same boat as you, and of the same opinion, until I
downloaded a recent version of Vuescan.  I'm very impressed with the
improvements Ed has made recently (I use an LS-30).  There are still
occasions where Nikonscan seems to get the better range of colors with
chromes (after editing both in Photoshop).  I'd like to understand why
this is but can't say that I do.  Color negs are beautiful with
Vuescan -- the image structure itself is considerably better than what
comes out of Nikonscan, and no complaints about the color.

Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: Julian Robinson <julian@austarmetro.com.au>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 10:51 PM
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan question


> I am one of those who has not found the problems that others report
with
> Nikonscan; I have found it to do what it should do, quickly and with
great
> control.  I bought Vuescan after reading how much better it was, but
have
> not found it to be either better or worse, just different and much
more
> difficult to use - for me (who has not spent much time on learning
how to
> cope with its non-G UI).  The histogram in Nikonscan I find
invaluable: I
> always feel as though I am flying blind with Vuescan even though the
> results are usually not bad.
>
> Last time I tried Vuescan's IR dust removal I found it didn't work
as well
> for me as ICE, but this may have improved since then, or at least I
should
> say it definitely has improved going by what I have read here.
>
> The bottom line for me is that I have both, and I actually use
> Nikonscan.  There are plenty of others for whom the opposite will
apply.  I
> will say that for most people there is nothing wrong with Nikonscan,
and it
> is one of the most powerful OEM scanning softwares around.  I
suggest the
> obvious - try Nikonscan (which you have) and try Vuescan
> (try-before-you-buy version) and compare.  Then tell us what you
discover.
>
> Julian
>
> PS if it is the learning curve that is worrying you about Nikonscan,
I
> think it is not too bad, and you will learn much about your scanner
> features and capabilities that would be useful anyway, even if you
end up
> using Vuescan.  The Vuescan interface means that you can remain
unaware of
> scanner features for a long time!
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> >[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Steve
Woolfenden
> >Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 5:27 PM
> >To: FILMSCANNERS
> >Subject: filmscanners: Vuescan question
> >
> >I'm a little apprehensive asking this question considering the
present
> >debate , but , I'm a total novice to scanning and you've got to
start
> >somewhere....
> >I've just bought a Nikon 4000 scanner , which came with the Nikon
Scan3
> >software . I've not even used it enough to form an opinion about it
, but
> >am wondering whether I should be going straight over to vuescan -
others
> >have told me its "better". Is this the case and what does it do
that the
> >supplied stuff wont?
> >Thanks ,
> >Steve
> >p.s. I see a few familiar names from the Contax list here - Hi
guys!
>
>
> Julian Robinson
> in usually sunny, smog free Canberra, Australia
>




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.