PC Review
Forums
Newsgroups
Hardware
Scanners
Vuescan behaviour of handling RAW files totally changed since 8.3.39
Forums
Newsgroups
Hardware
Scanners
Vuescan behaviour of handling RAW files totally changed since 8.3.39
![]() |
Vuescan behaviour of handling RAW files totally changed since 8.3.39 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
After installing the most recent version (8.3.53) of Vuescan I've
noticed that scanning my NikonScan "raw" files does not work as it used to (e.g. 8.3.39). I obtain the raw scans from NikonScan 4.0.2 by disabling Nikon Color Management and setting Gamma to 1.0 and apply the ICE dust removal as described in the following article http://groups.google.de/group/comp....679715d8b60d57e. When I now post-process the files with Vuescan they look as dark as the raw scans, totally different from what I got in 8.3.39. See examples via the below links (both obtained from the same raw file): http://www.olafmeyer.de/vuescan/dnp_8_3_39.jpg http://www.olafmeyer.de/vuescan/dnp_8_3_53.jpg I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very unsafe to do this! How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the original scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked into a propriatary raw format ... Olaf |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Olaf wrote: > I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with > NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to > unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very > unsafe to do this! > > How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the > files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the original > scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to > unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked > into a propriatary raw format ... > > Olaf That's strange. Have you written to Ed about this? Are you sure VS is set to output to a color space like AdobeRGB and not device RGB? Is it set to save Tiffs and not RAW files? Regarding creating Raw scans, if I were you, I'd continue to use NikonScan as at least you know what it delivers. Does NikonScan not do something that you need Vuescan for? |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Roger S. schrieb:
> Olaf wrote: >> I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with >> NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to >> unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very >> unsafe to do this! >> >> How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the >> files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the original >> scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to >> unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked >> into a propriatary raw format ... >> >> Olaf > > That's strange. Have you written to Ed about this? Are you sure VS is > set to output to a color space like AdobeRGB and not device RGB? Is it > set to save Tiffs and not RAW files? I've doubled checked. Settings are as they should be. When scanning from a file you cannot output as raw, but only to tiff or jpeg. I'm using AdobeRGB as the output colorspace. > Regarding creating Raw scans, if I were you, I'd continue to use > NikonScan as at least you know what it delivers. Does NikonScan not do > something that you need Vuescan for? NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do the complete scan in one step. That has several drawbacks in particular when batch scanning. I also do not like the colors that NikonScan produces, thus I've chosen the described workflow, which has been working good until now ... Only other option that I see is Silverfast, but as we all know it's also far from bug free and very pricy (particularly since I would need to buy the scanner and HDR version ...) Olaf |
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Regarding Silverfast HDR, you can get the DC version as it does the same
thing + handles digital camera files if that is of interest. The safest format to save in for archive is uncompressed TIFF . regards, Olaf wrote: > Roger S. schrieb: > >> Olaf wrote: >> >>> I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with >>> NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to >>> unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very >>> unsafe to do this! >>> >>> How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the >>> files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the original >>> scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to >>> unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked >>> into a propriatary raw format ... >>> >>> Olaf >> >> >> That's strange. Have you written to Ed about this? Are you sure VS is >> set to output to a color space like AdobeRGB and not device RGB? Is it >> set to save Tiffs and not RAW files? > > > I've doubled checked. Settings are as they should be. When scanning from > a file you cannot output as raw, but only to tiff or jpeg. I'm using > AdobeRGB as the output colorspace. > >> Regarding creating Raw scans, if I were you, I'd continue to use >> NikonScan as at least you know what it delivers. Does NikonScan not do >> something that you need Vuescan for? > > > NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do the > complete scan in one step. That has several drawbacks in particular when > batch scanning. I also do not like the colors that NikonScan produces, > thus I've chosen the described workflow, which has been working good > until now ... > > Only other option that I see is Silverfast, but as we all know it's also > far from bug free and very pricy (particularly since I would need to buy > the scanner and HDR version ...) > > Olaf |
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Olaf,
email me off list if you need a copy of the old version. remove the nospam. regards, degrub wrote: > Regarding Silverfast HDR, you can get the DC version as it does the same > thing + handles digital camera files if that is of interest. > > The safest format to save in for archive is uncompressed TIFF . > > regards, > > Olaf wrote: > >> Roger S. schrieb: >> >>> Olaf wrote: >>> >>>> I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with >>>> NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to >>>> unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very >>>> unsafe to do this! >>>> >>>> How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the >>>> files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the >>>> original >>>> scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to >>>> unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked >>>> into a propriatary raw format ... >>>> >>>> Olaf >>> >>> >>> >>> That's strange. Have you written to Ed about this? Are you sure VS is >>> set to output to a color space like AdobeRGB and not device RGB? Is it >>> set to save Tiffs and not RAW files? >> >> >> >> I've doubled checked. Settings are as they should be. When scanning >> from a file you cannot output as raw, but only to tiff or jpeg. I'm >> using AdobeRGB as the output colorspace. >> >>> Regarding creating Raw scans, if I were you, I'd continue to use >>> NikonScan as at least you know what it delivers. Does NikonScan not do >>> something that you need Vuescan for? >> >> >> >> NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do >> the complete scan in one step. That has several drawbacks in >> particular when batch scanning. I also do not like the colors that >> NikonScan produces, thus I've chosen the described workflow, which has >> been working good until now ... >> >> Only other option that I see is Silverfast, but as we all know it's >> also far from bug free and very pricy (particularly since I would need >> to buy the scanner and HDR version ...) >> >> Olaf |
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
> When scanning from > a file you cannot output as raw, but only to tiff or jpeg. Actually, you can output RAWs from RAWs (i.e. when scanning from a file), by enabling the "Enable raw from disk" option under the "Preferences " tab (advanced mode). Linus |
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:03:53 +0200, Olaf <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do the >complete scan in one step. That's just not true. You can load any file in NikonScan (not just the NEF format but also TIF, JPG etc.) and edit it any which way you want. Use File/Open or click on the Open Folder icon in the toolbar (first on the left). Furthermore, you can also import Photoshop curves and levels settings (*.alc and *.alv files) into NikonScan. Open the Curves palette and click on the down triangle in the upper right corner. This will drop down a menu. Click on "Import Curve Settings". This defaults to NikonScan curves (*.ncv) but if you click on Files Of Type you'll also get "Photoshop Levels and Curves". Indeed, if you're scanning raw using NikonScan and then switching to Vuescan for post-processing that's the absolutely worst thing you can ever do because Vuescan is so buggy and inferior. It will just end up totally mutilating your carefully scanned raw files with NikonScan. Don. |
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
degrub wrote:
> Regarding Silverfast HDR, you can get the DC version as it does the same > thing + handles digital camera files if that is of interest. OK, thanks for the suggestion. Since I now work with DSLRs that sounds like a reasonable idea Does it have any advantages over using AdobeCS2 with CameraRaw plugin? > The safest format to save in for archive is uncompressed TIFF . The question here is which files to archive. So far I've archived NikonScan 'raw' gamma1.0 scans in uncompressed TIFF format. But post-processing them with vuescan is a risky business as my results show. I don't know any other software to post-process them with ... Other option is to store vuescan raw files, but then I'm stuck with vuescan. And I'm now pretty sure that I don't want to lock myself this way. I think I will re-evaluate Silverfast, but then I'm probably also locked into silverfast ... Is there a safer way to obtain raw scans vor archiving purposes? I've used three different vuescan releases and get 3 totally different results and some of them are obviously wrong. It's fairly clear that the software is released without doing proper regression testing ... Here are links to the three different results, all using the same raw file and identical settings. Actually version 8.3.39 is also buggy, but 8.3.31 was OK. Judge yourself. http://www.olafmeyer.de/vuescan/vs_8_3_31.jpg (looks OK) http://www.olafmeyer.de/vuescan/vs_8_3_39.jpg (obviously corrupt) http://www.olafmeyer.de/vuescan/vs_8_3_53.jpg (much to dark!) An unhappy vuescan user, Olaf > Olaf wrote: >> Roger S. schrieb: >> >>> Olaf wrote: >>> >>>> I'm pretty shocked, since I've just scanned thousands of slides with >>>> NikonScan in order to do the post-processing with Vuescan. Due to >>>> unpredictable behavior with each new Vuescan release I guess it's very >>>> unsafe to do this! >>>> >>>> How safe is it actually to create raw scans in VueScan? These are the >>>> files that I want to archive, so that I have easy access to the >>>> original >>>> scans even in years from now. It seems pretty unsafe to me due to >>>> unpredictable changes in the software I'm using. I some how feel locked >>>> into a propriatary raw format ... >>>> >>>> Olaf >>> >>> >>> That's strange. Have you written to Ed about this? Are you sure VS is >>> set to output to a color space like AdobeRGB and not device RGB? Is it >>> set to save Tiffs and not RAW files? >> >> >> I've doubled checked. Settings are as they should be. When scanning >> from a file you cannot output as raw, but only to tiff or jpeg. I'm >> using AdobeRGB as the output colorspace. >> >>> Regarding creating Raw scans, if I were you, I'd continue to use >>> NikonScan as at least you know what it delivers. Does NikonScan not do >>> something that you need Vuescan for? >> >> >> NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do >> the complete scan in one step. That has several drawbacks in >> particular when batch scanning. I also do not like the colors that >> NikonScan produces, thus I've chosen the described workflow, which has >> been working good until now ... >> >> Only other option that I see is Silverfast, but as we all know it's >> also far from bug free and very pricy (particularly since I would need >> to buy the scanner and HDR version ...) >> >> Olaf |
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Don schrieb:
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 19:03:53 +0200, Olaf <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: > >> NikonScan is not capable of processing raw scans. I would need to do the >> complete scan in one step. > > That's just not true. > > You can load any file in NikonScan (not just the NEF format but also > TIF, JPG etc.) and edit it any which way you want. Use File/Open or > click on the Open Folder icon in the toolbar (first on the left). That's not what I call processing raw scans. I don't want to use it as an image editing tool ... > Furthermore, you can also import Photoshop curves and levels settings > (*.alc and *.alv files) into NikonScan. Open the Curves palette and > click on the down triangle in the upper right corner. This will drop > down a menu. Click on "Import Curve Settings". This defaults to > NikonScan curves (*.ncv) but if you click on Files Of Type you'll also > get "Photoshop Levels and Curves". > Indeed, if you're scanning raw using NikonScan and then switching to > Vuescan for post-processing that's the absolutely worst thing you can > ever do because Vuescan is so buggy and inferior. It will just end up > totally mutilating your carefully scanned raw files with NikonScan. You obviously aren't a vuescan fan ... Can you suggest a reasonable workflow that's future proof. The colors I get from NikonScan are not what I like. I'm looking for a solution that allows me store raw scans for archiving purposes and then to post-process these raw scans with another tool ... Olaf |
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Olaf wrote:
> That's not what I call processing raw scans. I don't want to use it as > an image editing tool ... > > You obviously aren't a vuescan fan ... Can you suggest a reasonable > workflow that's future proof. The colors I get from NikonScan are not > what I like. I'm looking for a solution that allows me store raw scans > for archiving purposes and then to post-process these raw scans with > another tool ... > > Olaf If you can dig up a working version of Vuescan, don't upgrade it. That's as close as future-proof as you can get for your current workflow, I think. I think the general concept of scanning with no color correction, grouping files by film type and then coming up with reference color correction levels/curves in Photoshop for batch processing makes the most sense. Photoshop isn't nearly as much of a moving target as Vuescan and gives you the most control. Step 1 is getting consistent output from your scanner (even consistently "wrong" is fine as it can be consistently corrected with an action in PS). |
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
|
|

Main Page 

Does it have any advantages over using Adobe
