Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Henry Ambrose wrote: >Someone else on this list mentioned the new version of Polacolor Insight >after I made the above post. So, I downloaded it and tried it again. My >previous experience was with a beta version. Well I got an OK scan from a >transparency. The negative profiles do not work worth a dam. The old >plug-in was/is much better all around. The new version of the Insight software is the stuff I tried. >>There is no software which will allow you to bring all the 12bit info into >>Photoshop, and that is what I want. >If (big if) I had good scanning software I'd be quite content at the 8bit >into PS. With good scanning software that allows you ACCURATE CONTROL >you'll get better 8 bits into PS. Probably better than you would believe. >I use Agfa scanners/scanning cameras and they actually have good scanning >software with real controls. True. As it is, I'll take the Photoshop adjustments. Better than any scanner software I've seen. >You should look at Silverfast. I've heard very good things about it. Its >what Leica uses for the S1 I think. (on topic now) I have. It's a little bit better, but not enough to justify the price. Again, 12bit into Photoshop is better, and offers more control. >Have you ever used any other scanners? Good software will work. It >exists! Just not shipped with desktop slide scanners. I have. Binuscan is better, as is the stuff that Linocolor ships. I've also used the older Polaroid software, the older Nikon stuff, and various Umax, Microtek etc. flatbed scanners. Also I've had a chance to play with an Imacon Flextight. The latter had better software, but I still prefer bringing the image in as a full 48 bit file. >>I just got a SF200 slide feeder for the Nikon. I intend my procedure to be: >>dump a bunch of slides into the feeder, set it for 16x multisampling and >>save the files to my hard drive. Go away for a few hours. Come back, open >>the images, do the basic corrections, and save the files as 8bit JPEGs at >>max quality (lossless). That brings the files down to between 7 and 13Mb. >>Then I write them to CD. >You might try to save them as native PS files. Probably fastest and >smallest, no loss. Faster yes, but larger. JPEG at max quality are lossless as well. >I'm not trying to tell you your equipment/way of working is faulty. >I am saying that what we get sold is not so good. And I 'm confused why >we keep getting crap. I kind of think if I keep bringing this up someone >(at a scanner maker) will hear it. I'm completely in agreement. The scanner market is a mess. We get incorrect specifications, both with respect to resolution and Dmax, so that comparisons cannot be made between scanners, and we get software that does not at all take advantage of the hardware we do have. What I would like is a) a scanner plug-in that can be configured properly and allow you to make decent scans in a one-click way, and b) a scanner plug-in or application that allows you to scan at the hardware's optimum specifications and import the raw file into Photoshop. The Nikon software comes close to the latter, but it isn't easy or completely raw. * Henning J. Wulff /|\ Wulff Photography & Design /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com