>By vitality I don't merely mean contrast/black-point/white-point. I also
>mean the nature of the tonality of the image. Something related to the
>question of "gamma" and also the inherent S-shaped response that all films
>have (so far as I know). So, all the effort I put into obtaining the full
>tonal range in a negative (in the form of a flat scan) is wasted because
>I get distinctly more pleasing images from Nikon Scan.
Out of interest, which scanner are you using? I get much more tonal information
out of Vuescan with the LS30 than Nikonscan - mostly I expect because Nikonscan
hobbles the output to 8 bits per channel.
Vuescan was a fait accompli for me anyhow - ealier versions of Nikonscan
gave me output made useless with jaggies. Nikonscan 3.1 is annoyingly slow
to do things like focus, autoexposure and the main scan.
Using curves in Photoshop or Picture Window Pro it seems easy to me to get
a "pleasing" result. *shrug* If Nikonscan gives you what you want, nobody
says you have to use Vuescan.
Rob Geraghty firstname.lastname@example.org