Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Share #1 Posted May 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi It seems that my Nikon 5000ED isnt able to scan at 4000dpi, as it should. Im using Vuescan, and the dpi settings is right. But the pictures, when enlarged, shows pixels. I understand that if the enlargement is big enough, pixels will apear sooner or later, but I have compared the same negative, in a prior scan with a Nikon Coolscan V ED, and the V ED scans are better, with better resolution. I have played with some of the options in Vuescan (DND, RAW, JPG, RGB...) and it seems like the scans at 4000dpi are the same as the scans at 1000dpi. Is it a scanner malfunction or a software? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 18, 2011 Posted May 18, 2011 Hi Tor1Amos, Take a look here Scanner Nikon 5000ED, cant scan 4000dpi. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gyoung Posted May 18, 2011 Share #2 Posted May 18, 2011 what size is the scan when you open it, if its 4000x6000 from a full frame then its doing 4000dpi. I do A2 orints from these with no visible pixels, at normal viewing distance. Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted May 18, 2011 what size is the scan when you open it, if its 4000x6000 from a full frame then its doing 4000dpi.I do A2 orints from these with no visible pixels, at normal viewing distance. Gerry Dont know right now. Will find out tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 18, 2011 Share #4 Posted May 18, 2011 I don't have Vuescan on this computer, so I can't do a screenshot to explain what I mean, but confusingly there are options in the 'Output' tab that can down-sample the parameters that you've set in the 'Input' tab. In other words, you can scan at 4000dpi, and then (stupidly in my view) it's possible to mistakenly save a file to disk at reduced quality and dimensions. This may only apply to jpeg versions of the image, (I don't recall all of the options right now), but make sure you're not applying any sort of compression or down-sampling in the 'Output' tab before looking for hardware problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted May 18, 2011 Dont know right now. Will find out tonight. Hmmm, I get 5625x3627 from 5000ED scan. The Nikon V ED scan (wich is without any visable pixels) is at 3946x5959. Not that big a difference, and cant explain the difference, can it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #6 Posted May 18, 2011 This - if it work, is the pic from the Nikon V ED This is the pic from the 5000ED Its not the best pic Im afraid, but look at the girls nose - or "nose-holes" (sorry cant spell nostroals...) Its i quite smoother in the V ED scan (and a bit lesser sharp as well) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted May 18, 2011 Share #7 Posted May 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Cool 5000 has a different CCD unit (2 rows) compare to the Cool VED. Could it be that due to some reasons only one line is activ and working? Just an idea - try this model together with the original software from Nikon in order to trace some Vuescan malfunctions.....or contact Mr. Hamrick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #8 Posted May 18, 2011 The Cool 5000 has a different CCD unit (2 rows) compare to the Cool VED. Could it be that due to some reasons only one line is activ and working?Just an idea - try this model together with the original software from Nikon in order to trace some Vuescan malfunctions.....or contact Mr. Hamrick. The 5000ED has recently been at Nikon for service - or so the seller told me. I will try the Nikon-software ( if I can find the damn cd) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted May 18, 2011 Share #9 Posted May 18, 2011 The 5000ED has recently been at Nikon for service - or so the seller told me. I will try the Nikon-software ( if I can find the damn cd) some paperwork or an invoice? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #10 Posted May 18, 2011 some paperwork or an invoice? Dont recall - have to search trough a bunch of stuff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 18, 2011 Author Share #11 Posted May 18, 2011 It seems like Ed Hamrick and Vuescan is to blame. Did the same scan with the Nikon software (wich is truly terrible to work with) and the result was no visable pixels when enlarging. You could clearly see the grains from the film. The enlarged details of the image apperad more soft - not as sharp as with Vuescan. I`m glad the scanner seems ok. Not sure what to do next though. Using the NICscan4 kinda scare me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penzes Posted May 19, 2011 Share #12 Posted May 19, 2011 I'm using the Nikon software and prefer above all other stuff. Convincing results and easy operation. I think, 99% of my scans are scanned without any modification in the scanner software. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nephilim Posted May 19, 2011 Share #13 Posted May 19, 2011 It seems like Ed Hamrick and Vuescan is to blame. Did the same scan with the Nikon software (wich is truly terrible to work with) and the result was no visable pixels when enlarging. You could clearly see the grains from the film. The enlarged details of the image apperad more soft - not as sharp as with Vuescan. Did you contact Ed and asked him about that issue? Usually, he's pretty quick at answering. Cheers, Torsten Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 19, 2011 Author Share #14 Posted May 19, 2011 Did you contact Ed and asked him about that issue? Usually, he's pretty quick at answering. Cheers, Torsten I did. Here is his reply (wich came after one hour) " Hi Roger, Try experimenting with the "Input | Fine mode" option. Regards, Ed Hamrick" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted May 19, 2011 Share #15 Posted May 19, 2011 I'm using the Nikon software and prefer above all other stuff. Convincing results and easy operation. I think, 99% of my scans are scanned without any modification in the scanner software. I too am quite happy with the Nikon software, usually scanned from Photoshop without any mods and then worked on in Photoshop. The differences in your picture size are very marginal, if its 4000 dots per inch, a very slight crop will bring it down below the theoretical 4000x6000 Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldh Posted May 19, 2011 Share #16 Posted May 19, 2011 I had a similar problem when first scanning Mamiya 7ll negs with a Coolscan 8000. After experimenting, and with some good advice, I found that excellent results were obtained by using the 16x multi-scan option on the Nikon software - though this is a slow process. My next experiment will be to see whether the A3 prints from the Mamiya are any better than those from the M9! Ronnie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tor1Amos Posted May 19, 2011 Author Share #17 Posted May 19, 2011 My version of the Vuescan was an older one. Downloaded the newest version, and the result is now better, pixelwise. I have used Vuescan over a couple of years and the thought of using the Nikon software again is kinda scary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted May 19, 2011 Share #18 Posted May 19, 2011 My version of the Vuescan was an older one. Downloaded the newest version, and the result is now better, pixelwise. I have used Vuescan over a couple of years and the thought of using the Nikon software again is kinda scary. My experience is the opposite, the Nikon software seems simple enough to me, at the time I was getting the scanner, Vuescan had the reputation of a idiosyncratic interface. I tried Silverfast, but in the end went back to the Nikon and generally do straight scans and any manipulation is done in Photoshop, which is much better at it, IMHO. Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted May 19, 2011 Share #19 Posted May 19, 2011 does the NikonScan work with Apple SnowLeopard? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penzes Posted May 19, 2011 Share #20 Posted May 19, 2011 does the NikonScan work with Apple SnowLeopard? Nope! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.