>
> Nevertheless, I would be interested in your assessment of Vuescan and
> its output relative to Nikonscan.
>
NikonScan is actually a very good program. It does an amazing job. In fact,
when using strips of film (or entire rolls with the 4000/5000 models), it
does a near perfect job of identifying the frames without skewing. VueScan
is quite finicky about that. Loading the scanner is a breeze--just insert
the end of the roll into the slot and just stand back and watch. If you are
scanning a 36-exposure roll in the 4000/5000, go do something else for a
while.
I prefer NikonScan for most scans, (especially of negative films), but rely
on VueScan for the really unusual scan that just doesn't want to work right
or is of a grainy film where I can do the multi-pass or multi-exposure
scans.
My Coolscan V-ED does not natively support multi-sampling (same as
multi-pass, except it does the multiple exposures in one pass keeping the
image sharper), but the Coolscan 4000 and 5000 does. To make up for this
deficiency in the V-ED, VueScan gives us the multi-pass function and
combines the image in computer, whereas the 4000 and 5000 may do the
combination in-scanner (with NikonScan).
The noise-removal algorithms are different. I prefer NikonScan most of the
time, but occasionally VueScan will do it better--depending on the fault.
NikonScan does scratches better, VueScan does dust-specs about the same.
What I really like about NikonScan is that I can scan and process the image
within the software for curves, saturation, noise removal (GEM is actually
quite good--depending on the film) and sharpening. I can output directly to
the finished JPEGs if I want with absolutely no need to open the files up in
an editor.
The bigger question is which model of Nikon Coolscan to get? Unless your
needs are for 120/220 roll film, the choices should be limited to the 4000,
5000 and V-ED. The 4000 and V-ED are the same speed, but the V-ED includes
ICE4 whereas the 4000 is ICE3. The 4000 and 5000 take entire rolls of 35mm
film by passing the film through a slot in the back of the unit. It uses the
same roll feeder as the V-ED, but the V-ED limits the strip length to
6-frames. The 5000 is the fastest of the bunch (at least 2x faster than the
V-ED) and has slightly better imaging performance. Slightly. The 4000 and
5000 also take the accessory slide-stack adaptor. Load up a stack of slides
and let er rip--and hope it doesn't jam while you are asleep.
I bought the V-ED because it seemed like it offered the best
performance/price out there and for that I have no doubts. However, I
personally should have purchased the 5000 because I've gotten to shooting
negatives so much and the speed issue is just that--an issue for me. Whether
or not it was worth the extra $500 was something I couldn't justify at the
time, but definitely could now.
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|