- #Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan how to#
- #Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan pro#
- #Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan software#
- #Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan Pc#
I own both applications, and my standard advice to newcomers in this field is to demo both and see what suits them best. In the same breath, I'll emphasize - I absolutely won't enter into a SilverFast vs Vuescan slug-fest here or any where else. When you buy SilverFast, it comes equipped with pre-made Kodachrome profiles specific to each scanner model the application supports. AFAIK, there is no more new stock of Kodachrome film and no labs to process it, so new batches of Kodachrome targets cannot be made.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/scanningfilmandslidesoverview2013-131108071423-phpapp01/95/photographic-film-and-slide-scanning-alternatives-1-638.jpg)
Unfortunately, these have become expensive because they are on the way to extinction. More to it than one can deal with in a forum post! That said, I have no problem with Dean's workflow - only a word of caution that there other ways of approaching this subject, of which his is a workable subset.įor scanning Kodachrome, it is most desirable to have a Kodachrome-specific scanner profile, made from a Kodachrome target. There is much more than what Dean says above about the most effective places to perform various kinds of image editing, and I spend a good deal of space in my book on SilverFast 8 explaining all that. I think you should differentiate between "spendy", as you put it, and "best option", because there are criteria other than cost which enter into the choice of scanner software. It is especially true of negatives that have been converted to positives in the scanning software. This is true regardless of whether they wear a DNG jacket or remain as TIFF. The most that they can claim for being "raw" is that provided they are scanned in linear gamma and until the user starts adjusting them, they are unadjusted scans - unadjusted, not "raw" in the digital camera sense. Scans emerge as three channel, rendered, pixel based images.
#Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan software#
Dean is right - in the sense that we do not get output from scanning software similar to the unprocessed data from a digital camera, (which then gets rendered after we process the raw data in a raw converter). There is questionable semantics in scanning circles about "RAW". OK, perhaps time to discuss some of what you raise above a bit more specifically. Quote from: schrodingerscat on December 02, 2012, 04:39:52 pm Greetings all. In any event, the article that you can find in the above link should get you started. What works best for me may or may not be best for you. From there on I do almost all my adjustments in LR. I also run my file through Neat Image to suppress film grain. For your B&W negatives you may also need to invert the file. If you import a file without an embedded profile into LR, LR will assume that the file is sRGB. My scanner profile also applies a gamma adjustment to the 16 bit linear file so that it looks normal (but usually still too dark, but that’s okay since LR can easily correct it). I then open my 16 bit linear scan in PS where I assign my scanner profile, and then convert to ProPhoto. I set my scanner exposure just like any other digital camera: ETTR. I optimize my scanner hardware adjustments (real hardware exposure adjustment, ICE and focus), but never touch the software adjustments (since I’ve found that LR does a much better job). My method is not the fastest or easiest, especially for large numbers of scans, but I only scan my best photos and I’m only interested in getting the best “RAW” scan my scanner is capable of producing. Here's what I’ve found gives the best results. I’ve tested VueScan, Silverfast and the scanner software that came with my scanner.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue55/10/images/figure13a1.jpg)
I use a different scanner, but my workflow is similar to yours.
#Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan how to#
So, if you already know how to output 16 bit linear, you’re already most of the way. You can output a linear tiff or a DNG, but the DNG is just a tiff in a DNG wrapper. I don’t think it possible to output true RAW. If not, hopefully someone can point me in the right direction to get easy to understand info on using the latest version of Vuescan with recent Macs. He's not technically inclined, so hoping someone can just recommend what settings to use for scanning mostly Kodachromes and B&W negs.
#Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan pro#
The initial tests with Vuescan Pro have been decent, so have been researching as to how to set it up for best results to create linear RAW files to post with Lightroom4. Silverfast is a bit spendy, so Vuescan seems the best option so far. Nikon has stopped supporting this device years ago and want to use it with OS 10.6.8, so that leaves out their software. I'm helping a friend set up a Coolscan V(LS-50) that he's had sitting around for awhile.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8CttPerCJP0/Tf8zks0-ChI/AAAAAAAABd8/JBdmuHVESl4/s1600/indian-college-girl-_f520.jpg)
Than there's the "Output Raw save film" checkbox, that actually means 'save negative as a positive file', thing. Is RAW RAW?, and is DNG DNG? Do you save as TIFF, or DNG and TIFF? Etc.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/fBICO5Nsl3E/maxresdefault.jpg)
#Silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan Pc#
either it's PC specific or references old versions. Sorry if this is a bit of flogging the horse, but the more I read on using Vuescan, the more confused I get.