KM DSE 5400 II: how to set the KM software for raw scan?

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

I want to use the scanner with the accompanying software
and get raw scans. My plan is to process the images later,
maybe again in the future, and have access to the digitised
images (slides and negs).

I expect that I will use the "DiMAGE Scan Utility".

Does the software do a real raw scan out of the box or should
I turn off some features?

I assume that things like ICE should be done at scan time
as it uses a separate light source (does it?). Same for multiple
pass scans (should I bother with my family/holiday pics?).

Can I use the software to process an image I saved earlier? I
could not find the option for opening a disk file.

TIA

 

[Mendel Leisk]

I want to use the scanner with the accompanying software
and get raw scans. My plan is to process the images later,
maybe again in the future, and have access to the digitised
images (slides and negs).

I expect that I will use the "DiMAGE Scan Utility".

Does the software do a real raw scan out of the box or should
I turn off some features?

I assume that things like ICE should be done at scan time
as it uses a separate light source (does it?). Same for multiple
pass scans (should I bother with my family/holiday pics?).

Can I use the software to process an image I saved earlier? I
could not find the option for opening a disk file.

TIA

If it is similare software to 5400 mkI, you cannot scan-from-disk.
However, to get a "raw" file, try outputting "16 bit linear", assuming
that is still available with your version of software.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

If it is similare software to 5400 mkI, you cannot scan-from-disk.
However, to get a "raw" file, try outputting "16 bit linear", assuming
that is still available with your version of software.

And then take over with Vuescan Scan-From-Disk

 

[Don]

And then take over with Vuescan Scan-From-Disk

Better still, simply use an(y) external editor.

In other words, why go through all the trouble of getting a raw image
out only to have Vuescan mutilate it?

Don.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

Because you'd likely be "mutilating" a copy, not the raw file.

 

[Wilfred]

Because you'd likely be "mutilating" a copy, not the raw file.

Mendel (and many others),

It's very difficult to read threads now that Google has made it
difficult for you to include other people's statements to which you
reply. Please consider the instructions given here:
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/

 

[Wilfred]

Better still, simply use an(y) external editor.

In other words, why go through all the trouble of getting a raw image
out only to have Vuescan mutilate it?

I think I'm with you here, Don. Unless you created a dedicated IT8
profile for 'raw' scans (which can be useful with slides), the only
thing VueScan does in postprocessing is applying black point, white
point and gamma settings. Of course you can apply its non-IR based dust
and scratches removal or its sharpening filter but there's nothing you
can't do better in, for instance, Photoshop.
If you insist on letting 'automated' algorithms do most of the work, you
could consider the PS workflow described by Bruce Fraser here:
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/17164-1.html
I never tried it with 'raw' scans but I think it should work.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

It's very difficult to read threads now that Google has made it
difficult for you to include other people's statements to which you
reply. Please consider the instructions given here:
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/

Like this?

 

[Wilfred]

Like this?

Something like this, yes. It would be even better if you could include
the author(s) of the quoted text but I don't know if Google allows for that.
A good alternative would be to use a dedicated newsgroup reader or a
combined e-mail & newsgroup client. IMO Mozilla Thunderbird is excellent
for text-only groups like this and it's free. Outlook express can do it
too, I think. You'll need access to an NNTP server, though.

 

[Don]

Because you'd likely be "mutilating" a copy, not the raw file.

I'm not quite sure what you mean, Mendel. The "DiMAGE Scan Utility" is
used to produce the raw file, right?

At this point there are two options:
1. Use Vuescan to edit this file (the misnamed "scan-from-disk")
2. Use any external editor to edit this file.

Also, what do you mean by working on a "copy"?

Don.

 

[Don]

I think I'm with you here, Don. Unless you created a dedicated IT8
profile for 'raw' scans (which can be useful with slides), the only
thing VueScan does in postprocessing is applying black point, white
point and gamma settings. Of course you can apply its non-IR based dust
and scratches removal or its sharpening filter but there's nothing you
can't do better in, for instance, Photoshop.

Yes, that's my point exactly! And you have all the extra tools in
Photoshop not available in Vuescan to analyze the image, etc. In
theory, one could even apply various profiles from Photoshop.

Now, some people may have Vuescan set up to perform certain
corrections "automatically" but, again, all of that can be done in
Photoshop much more accurately and more reliably using Actions, for
example.

If you insist on letting 'automated' algorithms do most of the work, you
could consider the PS workflow described by Bruce Fraser here:
http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/17164-1.html
I never tried it with 'raw' scans but I think it should work.

I'll check when I go online to send this but I think you're right,
there's nothing really special about a raw file. It's just another
image.

Don.

 

[JFV4492]

I'm not quite sure what you mean, Mendel. The "DiMAGE Scan Utility" is
used to produce the raw file, right?

At this point there are two options:
1. Use Vuescan to edit this file (the misnamed "scan-from-disk")
2. Use any external editor to edit this file.

Also, what do you mean by working on a "copy"?

Don.

Don is right on. Raw scans from Minolta's native sw is simple and
straight forward. Editing and preserving a raw file in PS can be done by
either editing a copy, or by using adjustment layers.

Mandel had brought up Vuescan's "scan-from-disk" numerous times here.
Each time someone had pointed out there is nothing special about this.
Time for him to stop doing it, or clarify what is the big deal with
"scan-from-disk".

 

[Mendel Leisk]

I'm not quite sure what you mean, Mendel. The "DiMAGE Scan Utility" is
used to produce the raw file, right?

At this point there are two options:
1. Use Vuescan to edit this file (the misnamed "scan-from-disk")

You're not editing the file. You're sourcing from it and outputting a
new file. The source file is intact, no change.

2. Use any external editor to edit this file.

Also, what do you mean by working on a "copy"?

Same as above.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

Don is right on. Raw scans from Minolta's native sw is simple and
straight forward. Editing and preserving a raw file in PS can be done by
either editing a copy, or by using adjustment layers.

Mandel had brought up Vuescan's "scan-from-disk" numerous times here.
Each time someone had pointed out there is nothing special about this.
Time for him to stop doing it, or clarify what is the big deal with
"scan-from-disk".

The original poster asked if it was possible to scan-from-disk with
Minolta Scan Utility, did he not? I made a suggestion, the best I could
think of, on-topic: a work-around.

Now you come by, then turn around and start outlining my faults as you
see them, to the assembly. Discussing me in 3rd party. Didn't anyone
ever tell you that's rude?

 

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
[trim]

I expect that I will use the "DiMAGE Scan Utility".

Does the software do a real raw scan out of the box or should
I turn off some features?

I assume that things like ICE should be done at scan time
as it uses a separate light source (does it?). Same for multiple
pass scans (should I bother with my family/holiday pics?).

Thanks you everyone, I understand that the consensus is that the
KM software will generate proper raw scans. My question was about
specifics, based on people who know the facts:

1) Which options should be selected/deselected to ensure a raw scan?

2) It was said to select "16-bit linear" and this I can see keeps
negatives as is, while "16-bit" saves them as positives. Is there
a loss in using 16-bits (not linear)?

3) Does ICE use special lighting, and as such cannot be performed
later? I know that I can apply other software based clean-up
solutions but I want to get the benefit of the IR scan if it
exists.

4) Are any of the other KM enhancements special and worth applying
at scan time? I would rather delay any process that can be
delayed.

TIA

 

[Mendel Leisk]

Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
[trim]

I expect that I will use the "DiMAGE Scan Utility".

Does the software do a real raw scan out of the box or should
I turn off some features?

The 16 bit linear ignores features you may have turned on. As you saw,
images are not inverted, for one. And the gamma has not been raised. I
think you're ok. Maybe turn off color management option, just to be
sure.

ICE can only be done at time of scan. I don't know if I would bother
with multi-pass with the Elite 5400. I found the difference very
slight. Just very slightly cleaner shadows.

Thanks you everyone, I understand that the consensus is that the
KM software will generate proper raw scans. My question was about
specifics, based on people who know the facts:

1) Which options should be selected/deselected to ensure a raw scan?

2) It was said to select "16-bit linear" and this I can see keeps
negatives as is, while "16-bit" saves them as positives. Is there
a loss in using 16-bits (not linear)?

If you use 16 bit instead of 16 bit linear, I do think Minolta is doing
histogram tweaking. And with linear, the scan is gamma 1.0, I think.
And this what you-know-what program is expecting for it's
can't-be-named workflow.

3) Does ICE use special lighting, and as such cannot be performed
later? I know that I can apply other software based clean-up
solutions but I want to get the benefit of the IR scan if it
exists.

ICE is time of scan only. I do a little post scan clean-up of my 16 bit
linears in Photoshop, prior to can't-be-named. PS proof setup helps in
this regard, just set it to default to the Scan-Elite posi linear
profile, with no files open. Then you can toggle this brightness aid on
and off with "ctrl y" key combo.

4) Are any of the other KM enhancements special and worth applying
at scan time? I would rather delay any process that can be
delayed.

Manual focus. Coupled with the right slide mount, you can get close to
complete corner to corner focus, but this an elusive goal.

All of this assumes you're scanning slides. Are you??

 

[Eyal Lebedinsky]

Eyal Lebedinsky wrote: [trim]

4) Are any of the other KM enhancements special and worth applying
at scan time? I would rather delay any process that can be
delayed.

Manual focus. Coupled with the right slide mount, you can get close to
complete corner to corner focus, but this an elusive goal.

All of this assumes you're scanning slides. Are you??

Both slides and negs.

 

[Don]

You're not editing the file. You're sourcing from it and outputting a
new file. The source file is intact, no change.

That is an edit! The fact that the source file hasn't changed is not
the point. (Please see below first for explanation.)

Same as above.

OK, I think I understand now what you mean.

What I was talking about is the result and then the fact that the
source hasn't changed is not the issue. It would be like saying "the
film in the scanner doesn't change".

Now, the OP may have specifically asked about "scan-from-disk" and if
the file changes, so your answer may have been correct, strictly
speaking, in relation to that question but I wasn't addressing that.

My side-note was that it's very important to explain to the OP that
the misleadingly misnamed "scan-from-disk" has absolutely nothing to
do with scanning and is nothing special. It's simply inferior image
editing using Vuescan as an editor. Far superior results can be
obtained by using a proper editor. Especially, if he goes through the
trouble of getting raw data out.

In other words, strictly speaking your answer may have been correct,
but my point was that his questions was wrong! ;o)

Don.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

That is an edit! The fact that the source file hasn't changed is not
the point. (Please see below first for explanation.)


OK, I think I understand now what you mean.

What I was talking about is the result and then the fact that the
source hasn't changed is not the issue. It would be like saying "the
film in the scanner doesn't change".

Now, the OP may have specifically asked about "scan-from-disk" and if
the file changes, so your answer may have been correct, strictly
speaking, in relation to that question but I wasn't addressing that.

My side-note was that it's very important to explain to the OP that
the misleadingly misnamed "scan-from-disk" has absolutely nothing to
do with scanning and is nothing special. It's simply inferior image
editing using Vuescan as an editor. Far superior results can be
obtained by using a proper editor. Especially, if he goes through the
trouble of getting raw data out.

The option to go thru another editor is still available. I know what
you're saying. So you have your intact raw file. Sometime in the
future, the option to work it in photoshop is still there. Again, I'd
only save as a copy. My PS smarts are next to nil, so this is good
strategy for me, for the interm, or any other duffer, I think.

 

[Don]

The option to go thru another editor is still available. I know what
you're saying. So you have your intact raw file. Sometime in the
future, the option to work it in photoshop is still there. Again, I'd
only save as a copy. My PS smarts are next to nil, so this is good
strategy for me, for the interm, or any other duffer, I think.

Although it may look scary at first, PS is not really that difficult.
Especially since there are a number of automatic modes. Not only in
tools but there is a way of PS fixing the image for you and presenting
you with several versions. You then pick the one which looks the best
and the process repeats - you get another bunch of images to evaluate.
It's very quick and painless. After only a few iterations you can
arrive at pretty good results.

And then slowly as you use it you start to pick up things. Like many
others I now look at my first edits and recoil. Which means at some
time in the future I'll probably do the same about my current
edits!;o)

Of course, PS is not free, but I'd say if one has lots of images to do
then an external editor of any kind is really a good investment, not
only in terms of cash but also in terms of improved results.

Don.