![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://www.ephotozine.com/articles/silverfast-ai-studio-8-2-review-26521/images/1000-Nikon-Scan-Batch-File-Save-Options_1416400458.jpg)
- #SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN HOW TO#
- #SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN DRIVER#
- #SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN UPGRADE#
- #SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN SOFTWARE#
- #SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN TRIAL#
It is, however, good enough for web-size viewing. They work sometimes, but more often they will leave a mess you'll have to clean up that is probably just as much trouble as removing the dust yourself. The Digital ICE on my Nikon 5000 with Nikon Scan, and VueScan's IR cleaning with the 5000, are NOT things that completely work with Kodachrome. But it still crashes as much as it does anywhere else. It's a PowerPC-only application, but it runs on Intel with Rosetta, even under Snow Leopard (I have used it thusly). You'll get Nikon Scan with the scanner, and you can download it from Nikon's website, too.
#SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN SOFTWARE#
So, VueScan's IR cleaning feature uses the scanner's hardware (so if it's better in the 9000, it'll be better) but it has its own software implementation, so it's not Digital ICE. ICE is a software thing, but it requires hardware support.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://static.bhphotovideo.com/explora/sites/default/files/SILVERFAST-LARGE.jpg)
And if you ever get a different scanner you have to buy it all over again. That alone is the reason I never bothered trying it. The big problem with Silverfast is the price. You have to figure it out and fiddle with it. The big problem with VueScan is that the user interface is a crime against humanity. It crashes during batch scans, and then you have to figure out which frames were already scanned and start over for the others. The big problem with NikonScan is that it crashes.
#SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN UPGRADE#
I ultimately paid for an upgrade to SilverFast so I guess I felt it was worth it. SilverFast does a better job with tough slides and a slightly better job in general but it's slower and more complicated and way more expensive. Faded, older, aged, poorly colored slides not so much. So I am not sure what they are talking about here.īecause of that, you can't test it with the ONE feature that matters most - Kodachrome calibration - so you have to take a major leap in cost to *fully* test it!Īll that being said, I find that VueScan does a great job in general with quality slides. However, I have never been able to get the calibration profile from SilverFast to function in other software. The problem with SilverFast is that they don't allow you to demo the calibration feature because, according to them, if you calibrate using the demo, you can use that calibration profile for any other software and they don't want to enable other vendors to benefit from LaserSoft's calibration. I have had mixed results with all three software (albeit on an older LS-2000) and definitely have to use all three programs on some slides to decide which output is better.
#SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN TRIAL#
In contrast, I downloaded the trial version of SilverFast 9.Since the NikonScan software will come with the scanner and both VueScan and SilverFast have fully functional trial versions, there's plenty of opportunity for you to test all three on some favorite slides as well as some difficult to scan ones you may have. Nikon Scan delivered an acceptable result (far, far better than any of my efforts) on the first pass. I had been battling with this problem for a long time, without a satisfactory solution (because of my own limited understanding/ability). On the very first scan attempt with Nikon Scan it solved a problem that I have on over 100 slides. Having installed it and got it working I am really surprised at how well it works, how much function it has, how well it is documented and therefore how much easier it is to use than Vuescan. Yes, apologies for asking this rather stupid question: I found it for myself. Are there any special scanning requirements implied by negadoctor in darktable? Or in the equivalent in Rawtherapee (is there such an equivalent?). Later on I will be scanning colour negative film. Is this double scanning a good idea? How does it work?
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](https://www.silverfast.com/img/newsletter200812/time_en.jpg)
#SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN HOW TO#
Unfortunately no examples of how to do it are given. So, where and how should I do dust and scratch removal? Steinhoff also talks about scanning in 64-bit RGBI mode, producing a raw file and then rescanning that in Vuescan to remove dust and scratches. I see some advice not to use the dust and scratch removal in Vuescan as this functionality impacts the image quality. The second issue is that the slides have dust and scratches. So, can somebody recommend a suitable set of parameters for scanning mostly Kodachrome, with a few Agfa slides too. I have read both of Sascha Steinhoff’s books on using Vuescan multiple times and just become more confused on how to set it up. The first issue that presents itself is the setting of the parameters (especially on the Input tab) in Vuescan. I will do post processing in either, or both, darktable or Rawtherapee.
![silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan silverfast vs viewscan vs nikon scan](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xEqEGlB33mY/SP8o-cFAnTI/AAAAAAAAAYo/vvT0YqlyCBU/s320/desy+ratnasari.jpg)
#SILVERFAST VS VIEWSCAN VS NIKON SCAN DRIVER#
I’m wanting to digitise a large number of 40 to 60 year old slides and lpan to use Vuescan with my Nikon Coolscan V ED, in preference to Silverfast and my Epson V700 (I don’t have a Coolscan driver for Silverfast).