> My answer made a clear assumption based on the original
> question: Truth to tell, only a small percentage of the
> slides I've shot are worth scanning so I'm wondering if it
> might not be better to let the pros do it.
Based on the specific question being asked, I don't disagree
with your analysis. Of course, each of us have our definition
of "small percentage" and "worth scanning". For me, this
criteria amounts to over 2000 slides and untold negatives.
> As you have pointed out before, you use VueScan,
> rather than NikonScan and, as I recall, often or usually go
> 16-bit for your fine art images.
My ratio of VueScan vs NikonScan changes month by month based on
what's going on in my life. Nearly everything destined for Stock
goes through NikonScan. With the LS-20, I was exclusively using
VueScan, but with the V-ED, NikonScan is good enough that
Vuescan isn't really necessary. When I can't use ICE, like for
B&W or Kodachromes, Vuescan is the better choice. Hamrick's
updates over the past month have addressed a couple issues that
were problematic for me.
> Had the question been about simply getting a decent library of
> images from all keepers, I would have said something else.
And I was kinda reading between the lines of his inquiry and
assumed this. My bad.
AG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|