Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nathan wrote: "Do give Vuescan a chance. I too have a Nikon LS-2000, and have vaccilated between Nikon Scan and Vuescan, finally settling on the latter. Yes, it is not as easy to use as Nikon Scan, but when I look at the resulting scans in Photoshop, I see clearly superior results from Vuescan. I also agree that Vuescan is slower, but once you have all the options set correctly, it is worth the wait." I agree. I find there is better rendition of both extremes of the brightness range with Vuescan and an easier means of controlling how the sw places the white and black points. Is that your experience, Nathan? Waiting for the file to "process" is a pain. If I was doing the work commercially, it would be unacceptable. But the resulting image is better to work with than from the faster programs - Nikonscan and Silverfast (5.5). I think color is closer to correct on those programs, for Reala anyway. I have to do heavy correction in Photoshop to what the Vuescan white balance usually renders. Still the final result is better, and I use the processing time to read the LUG digest. Carl - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html