Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Follow-up OT Nikon LS-2000 under MacOS X
From: Carl Pultz <cpultz@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 15:37:43 -0500

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

Replies: Reply from Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch> ([Leica] Re: Vuescan (WAS: Follow-up OT Nikon LS-2000 under MacOS X))