Scanning differences

[lleo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Since there are several threads about scanners in here, I want to show you some of my experiences.

Here you can see the same picture scanned on a Nikon Coolscan IV ED with the native Nikonscan software and with Vuescan.

I only use Linux so I don't have the chance to use Silverfast since it's only made for Win and Mac.

The top scan is the Nikon, the bottom is Vuescan. Check how different they are.

 

 

The photo has been taken with a B&W 022, medium yellow filter and the film is Ilford Pan F Plus 50 iso.

None of the scan has been touched in any way.

Look at the levels (Livelli di ingresso): Nikoscan falls abruptly on the highlights while Vuescan fills the whole spectrum.

It's not that one is better than the others, just different. I guess Silverfast is also different.

There's also another curiousity. Even though I scanned as B&W or grayscale, once I opened it up in Gimp (didn't want to switch to Windows to work it on Photoshop) the Vuescan image is grayscale while the one scanned with Nikonscan is RGB and I had to change it to grayscale.

And it's the same with the various programs for digital: Rawtherapee, Darktable, Lightroom and so on.

[chris_livsey]

Since there are several threads about scanners in here, I want to show you some of my experiences.

Here you can see the same picture scanned on a Nikon Coolscan IV ED with the native Nikonscan software and with Vuescan.

I only use Linux so I don't have the chance to use Silverfast since it's only made for Win and Mac.

The top scan is the Nikon, the bottom is Vuescan. Check how different they are.

 

 

 

Nikon software (any)  is among the worst written in the known, and probably most of the unknown, universe.

Native Epson software on their scanners does a pretty good job.

[Doc Henry]

Thanks for your post Ileo.

 

How is the original photo on the negative ?
The only way to know is to go through an enlarger and print on photo paper
I think it will change again !
For NKscan software, I find that there is more nuance vs.Vuescan that reproduces

more "flat" ,  identical exposure everywhere and less shade and nuance.

Best

Henry

[lleo]

Well Doc, it was a quite sunny days with white clouds. So it was pretty luminous. Say... the photo might have been between the two.

The high whites on Vuescan seem a little burnt while the Nikonscan shows more middle tones. But, as said, the photo was untouched.

I'll see what happens with the minimum work on it.

[philipus]

Thanks for this interesting comparison.

 

I'm looking at my rather (well, very) poor office screen so this is fwiw, but it seems to me that the Nikon Scan scan has more detail in the shadows. For post-processing I am wondering if I wouldn't prefer that scan over the Vuescan scan due to the lower contrast and flatter, duller appearance.

 

Btw, how does Nikon Scan run under Linux? I use it occasionally on my Mac booted into Snow Leopard but it isn't an ideal solution. 

 

br
Philip

[lleo]

Hi Philip.

Yes, it's correct. Shadows have more detail with Nikonscan. Actually the program only runs in Windows, unfortunately. I have a partition on my computer and I only goes in Windows when I have to scan film or using Photoshop.

I haven't tried using with Wine in Linux. I should give it a try to get rid of Windows forever.

This is also why I've downloaded Vuescan to see how it works.