C.H.Ling wrote:
>With my experience the Epson 4870 do reach around 2800dpi resolution.
>
Thanks for the info.
>I have no idea why you will think Vuescan will make it better,
>
Reports on forums and personal experience with a Can*n 5000F.
Ed Hamrick just finished film support for the 5000F, so I had to try it
out. I scanned an old outtake slide from a graduation
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Combo.jpg>. Be sure to view at 100%,
some browsers/settings will reduce it to fit on the screen. The bottom
row of samples are:
1. 5000F using CanoScan software at 2400 dpi, full pixel sample, no
processing.
2. 5000F using VueScan software at 2400 dpi, full pixel sample, no
processing.
3. FS2710 using VueScan at 2700 dpi, downsampled to same size as 2400
dpi scans. I think I sharpened this, not sure.
4. Scan #3 with grain reduction applied with NeatImage.
The 2 samples at the top are full pixel versions of #3 & 4 before size
reduction, so you can see downsizing hasn't changed anything significant.
As you can see, the Canoscan software gives a significantly less
detailed image with less contrast than VueScan with this scanner. Color
balance is off too and it crops the image on all sides. Oh, and takes
2-3 times as long to scan.
>I have just tried both Vuescan and Epson original software both give the same
>resolution, see
>the cropped scans below:
>
>http://www.accura.com.hk/Vuescan-1.jpg
>
>http://www.accura.com.hk/Epson-1.jpg
>
>They look very soft, but remember they are scanned at 4800dpi and no sharpen
>applied.
>
Thanks for the samples. I can't pick either one out as better than the
other. More grist for my decision mill.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
