Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi All, In a message dated 97-11-15 11:19:01 EST, Frederic wrote: << My question is have you had any experience with Nikon scanners? Can you suggest a way to get lighter scans with the Nikon software? Incidentally, have you tried photo cd's, I've been told they are good to 11 x 14 in final printed pieces if scanned properly. Can anyone recommend a good outfit on the east coast that does decent kodack cd scans? >> I have used the Coolscan II for about a year and a half now, as well as thousands of Photo CD scans. On balance they both have produced high-quality results, but they each have their limitations. The Coolscan is capable of producing higher-resolution scans than a Photo CD (for ease of reference: about 25MB at 24 bits, versus 18MB at 24 bits for the PCD). With properly exposed slides and negatives, I have not noticed the darkness problem you mentioned, but it is pretty sensitive to any underexposure. PCDs, on the other hand, seem more tolerant of underexposed images, perhaps because the Kodak scanner has a brighter or more variable light source, sometimes yielding usable results where the Coolscan fails. The other problem with the Coolscan is its sensitivity to ANY vibration. Even the coolong fans of adjacent computers have resulted in "jittery" scans. I use the 18MB images processed down to about 15 MB to print poster-sized output on a large HP (d-sized) inkjet all the time with astonishingly good results (especially with Leica originals!). Good luck, and give PCDs a try. If the Coolscan continues to fail on properly exposed images, try the same slide at a local dealer's machine and see if the results are better. If so, the light source on your Coolscan may be defective. Cheers, Will von Dauster