![]() No need to permanently preserve a patch of grass or the back of someones head.I've been using VueScan for years and it's great. Just use a red marker to mark the edges of the ones not to be scanned. I would also suggest setting up your slide projector and culling. Its a lot easier and more effective to do that in photoshop.įine mode took a lot of extra time, and also did not noticably improve the result so I discontinued using it. I would suggest against trying to use vuescan for post processing. I then just tuck the DNG RAWs into a subfolder. When I do this though I also output at the same time as a tiff adobe RGB 98. This allows me to go back and either apply ice or not as well as output in a different color space. ![]() ![]() ![]() I like the idea of DNG RAW (64 bit RGBI)and have done it myself. I have read elsewhere and come to the conclusion myself that multisampling probably does more good in older machines. This resulted in me going back and rescanning a fair number of images. More than 4x tends to create more noise than anything else. Multisampling did do a little bit of good for underexposures up to 4x. For good exposures I could never tell the difference even when a very high magnification in photoshop. I started like you multisampling but gave it up. They're both good enough to use.Ī little late to the game, but here is some more advice. ICE tends to eat away at high contrast edges a bit. I've been testing both pieces of software. My own scanning tips are here: īy the way, recent versions of Vuescan's IR cleaning are more effective than Nikonscan's ICE with the LS-5000 for E6 slides (I don't scan Kodachrome). With most slides this isn't necessary but for those high contract hard to scan ones it can be worthwhile. To get more detail in dark areas (really more detail and more accurate color) I recommend scanning twice and blending exposures in a third party program (not Vuescan). It is an effective technique at reducing scanner noise in shadows, and I use it in lieu of multiscanning with my other scanner that can't do single pass multisampling (the Canon FS4000US). īased on my own tests I have found no benefit to detail in dark areas from multi-exposure. I encourage you to do tests yourself rather than rely on any web wisdom (including from me). Multisampling reduces noise in dark areas and multi-exposure provides more detail in dark areas (due to the second longer exposure scan). Was under the impression the multisampling and multi-exposure are used for two different purposes. It can get really frustrating to get some distance into the project and then discover shortcomings in your workflow. I would suggest to devote some time to researching the possibilities before plunging in. It is capable of cleaning, using the same infrared data, but it is not as good.ģ000 slides is a lot. The latter has a much more diffuse light source for starters, plus a frosted translucent panel (Grain Dissolver), that can be rotated into the light path, for more diffusion.Īlso, if your slides are really in need of ICE, bear in mind that Vuescan does not use ICE. FWIW, I have a V, and a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 (first gen). More than likely, devotees of the Coolscan line will be along shortly to say the opposite.Īnyway, that's my experience. The Coolscan 5000 and V have highly directional light sources, that doesn't work well with the special structure of KC. In particular if you use ICE: it is prone to artifacts at dark/light transitions. I don't think the Nikon Coolscan 5000 is a good choice for scanning Kodachrome. Saying that, I don't want to waste time unnecessarily by over-engineering the process! Time isn't really an issue, as I can generally leave the scanner unattended while is works through a batch of slides (I haven't had much of a problem with slides jamming). I appreciate there's always a trade off between speed and quality, and I'm conducting experiments using different settings. "Multi-exposures" (two scans at different exposures) "Number of Samples" (multiple samples during one pass and average reading taken) I'm interested to know people's experience of using: I've decided to scan everything as DNG RAW (64 bit RGBI) and do the processing as a separate step. I'm using VueScan and am currently investigating the best general settings to use. I'm about to embark on a personal project to scan about 3000+ mostly kodachrome slides from the 1960s/70s using a Nikon 5000 ED and SF-210 slide feeder.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |