Vuescan - new features

[Robert Feinman]

If you haven't checked lately you might want to look at
the latest Vuescan version. Ed has moved the graphs to a
panel under the options so that you can view the graph
and the image simultaneously.
He has also added a gamma curve adjustment with two
control points so you can do S-shaped adjustments.

 

[Don]

If you haven't checked lately you might want to look at
the latest Vuescan version.

Thanks for the spam! We just don't get enough of it. :-/

BTW, you forgot to mention all the endless bugs your Ed (re)introduced
in the latest version. Oh well... Judging by Vuescan's miserable track
record "Vuescam" victims will do that themselves very shortly.

Don.

 

[Roger S.]

Thanks Robert, that's interesting. Does the gamma curve adjustment
have any functionality that Photoshop curves doesn't have or is it just
to save post processing time?
Is everything else working as expected?

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

Does the gamma curve adjustment have any functionality that
Photoshop curves doesn't have or is it just to save post processing
time?

The curves control feature is implemented a bit differently compared
to most photo editors. The adjustment is applied to linear gamma data
after setting black/whitepoints, but before Gamma adjustment. So don't
expect to use the same settings as one would use in Photoshop. The
Preview/Scan tab will show the effect after all (including gamma and
colorspace) adjustments, so go by that.

Bart

 

[Roger S.]

Thanks, Bart, I was wondering exactly that. Just having curves on the
final gamma 2.2 data wouldn't be all that interesting a feature. I'll
download the new version and test it out on some slides.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

I found simply bumping the numbers from default 25/75 to 20/80 worked
very much like PS shadow/highlight: recovered shadow detail in
moderately underexposed slides, along with improved highlight.

Also really like the wildcard feature: introduced 2 releases back, but
not de-bugged until one release back.

 

[Pasi Savolainen]

Thanks for the spam! We just don't get enough of it. :-/

BTW, you forgot to mention all the endless bugs your Ed (re)introduced
in the latest version. Oh well... Judging by Vuescan's miserable track
record "Vuescam" victims will do that themselves very shortly.

For someone so very dissatisfied with 'vuescam' you seem religiously
obsessed with it.

btw. Thanks to original poster, wouldn't have noticed.

 

[Don]

The curves control feature is implemented a bit differently compared
to most photo editors.

Yet another of your very creative and circumspect ways of trying to
minimize a Vuescan bug! ;o)

But as hard as you try to hide it, your hand-wringing discomfort is
still palpable.

The adjustment is applied to linear gamma data
after setting black/whitepoints, but before Gamma adjustment. So don't
expect to use the same settings as one would use in Photoshop.

So, here we go again... Gee, you could've waited at least a little bit
before proving me right! ;o)

Don.

 

[Don]

For someone so very dissatisfied with 'vuescam' you seem religiously
obsessed with it.

btw. Thanks to original poster, wouldn't have noticed.

And yet - strangely enough - you did notice the above message!

Now that's real obsession when you're too busy stalking objective
"Vuescam" critics to even bother to check for new releases.

Don.

 

[Don]

Just having curves on the
final gamma 2.2 data wouldn't be all that interesting a feature.

That's just silly beyond belief, Roger! It's like saying "just editing
with your eyes open wouldn't be all that interesting a feature".

In your blind rush to cheerlead you've abandoned all common sense.

Do you even know what Curves are?

1. In order to create a curve you need to determine its points.
2. In order to determine the points you need to sample the image.

How can you do that when the display shows you a 2.2 image while the
curve is (secretly!) applied to the 1.0 data and after B&W point!?!?
(All this according to Bart.)

"Interesting" is right, like driving a car at high speed with your
eyes closed is "interesting".

Don.

 

[Wayne]

For someone so very dissatisfied with 'vuescam' you seem religiously
obsessed with it.

Yes, it really is a show isnt it? It's like the little yapping dog, walk
by it and it absolutely is going to start yapping, incessantly, about
nothing, but it simply never stops. What you can do? Kicking it isnt
right either.

In exactly the same way, when any one even mentions VueScan here, then
immediately Don appears, with his incessant yapping. He does an
incredible monitoring job, he never misses one. Quite an agenda. But
most newgroups do have one loonie that needs to be kill-filed in order to
transform the forum back to usefulness. Try it, it makes a big
difference.

Meanwhile, Vuescan really can give easy and amazingly good results, very
difficult to match from film.

 

[Jeff Randall]

The curves control feature is implemented a bit differently compared
to most photo editors.

Yet another of your very creative and circumspect ways of trying to
minimize a Vuescan bug!

The adjustment is applied to linear gamma data
after setting black/whitepoints, but before Gamma adjustment. So don't
expect to use the same settings as one would use in Photoshop.

So, here we go again... Gee, you could've waited at least a little bit
before proving me right!

Don: Now we are finally getting somewhere. Thanks for finally going
on the record with your definition of "bug"; that is any feature that
is not implemented or does not work exactly like PhotoShop (or ICE or
GEM or etc.) or perhaps any feature that is not implemented or does not
work exactly like you think it should. You have added a new chapter
and verse to the English lexicon. Unfortunately I doubt if the folks
at Webster or Oxford will be giving you a call anytime soon. No wonder
you think VueScan is buggy wall to wall.

 

[Don]

Don: Now we are finally getting somewhere. Thanks for finally going
on the record with your definition of "bug"; that is any feature that
is not implemented or does not work exactly like PhotoShop (or ICE or
GEM or etc.) or perhaps any feature that is not implemented or does not
work exactly like you think it should.

Except for one "minor" detail which Vuescan apologist always miss:

I did not say *any* of that!

As Vuescan apologists regularly do, you (misre)presented your
subjective feeling of what you THINK I said without any basis in fact.

So, let me (try to) make it even clearer (and all according to Bart,
so if you disagree, talk to him):

- The program presents one image (gamma 2.2) for the user to determine
the settings.
- The program then applies these settings to a *totally different*
image (gamma 1.0, B&W points, etc).

That's a canonical definition of a *bug*!

You have added a new chapter
and verse to the English lexicon. Unfortunately I doubt if the folks
at Webster or Oxford will be giving you a call anytime soon.

Please enlighten us and your favorite guardians of the English
language what would you call the above case of "bait and switch"?

No wonder you think VueScan is buggy wall to wall.

I just go by what frustrated Vuescan users themselves post and other,
equally frustrated users, immediately confirm. So, if you have a
problem with any of that I suggest you address them.

Don.

 

[Roger S.]

No need for the outrage, take it easy there. Photoshop curves edits on
the final 2.2 data so simply adding that to Vuescan wouldn't be of any
interest to me, any more than the sharpening and grain reduction
features in VS are of interest. I already have a photo editor.
I don't know if the Vuescan method will yield worthwhile results, but
playing with it is of interest to me.

 

[Roger S.]

Don wrote: "- The program presents one image (gamma 2.2) for the user
to determine
the settings.
- The program then applies these settings to a *totally different*
image (gamma 1.0, B&W points, etc).
That's a canonical definition of a *bug*! "

Only to you, sweetie.

Also, weren't you the one who posted the stuff from AMP about benefits
of gamma 1.0 editing?

 

[Pasi Savolainen]

No need for the outrage, take it easy there. Photoshop curves edits on
the final 2.2 data so simply adding that to Vuescan wouldn't be of any
interest to me, any more than the sharpening and grain reduction
features in VS are of interest. I already have a photo editor.
I don't know if the Vuescan method will yield worthwhile results, but
playing with it is of interest to me.

It is of much interest if it can do all the editing in 16bit and then save
the result in 8bit (for those of us without access to stable 16bit aware
applications *cough*GIMP*cough*).

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

SNIP

It is of much interest if it can do all the editing in 16bit and
then
save the result in 8bit (for those of us without access to stable
16bit aware applications *cough*GIMP*cough*).

Exactly. Especially important to those that want to produce JPEGs (or
as VueScan allows to simultaneously create e.g. JPEG+ TIFF + an
Index). Re-processing a JPEG is a bad idea, so the long asked for
addition of a type of curves control is much appreciated.

Bart

 

[Wilfred]

As Vuescan apologists regularly do, you (misre)presented your
subjective feeling of what you THINK I said without any basis in fact.

So, let me (try to) make it even clearer (and all according to Bart,
so if you disagree, talk to him):

- The program presents one image (gamma 2.2) for the user to determine
the settings.
- The program then applies these settings to a *totally different*
image (gamma 1.0, B&W points, etc).

That's a canonical definition of a *bug*!

As long as you can see the effect of your adjustments in the final image
(gamma 2.2) this is not a problem, and certainly not a bug.

If you do a curves adjustment in Photoshop, you are manipulating the
image in its own color space (e.g., Adobe RGB). Yet, if you are working
with a monitor profile, Photoshop converts the image for display to your
monitor space. This would be exactly the same 'bug', since you're not
manipulating in the same color space as the image on the monitor is!

(by the way, if VueScan is configured correctly, it will also produce a
displayed image converted to your monitor space. Yet another 'bug'!)

 

[Don]

No need for the outrage, take it easy there.

First of all let me see which Roger this is... ;o)

(A bit of self-deprecating humor there. See message to John for more.)

Seriously though, my apologies again.

Photoshop curves edits on
the final 2.2 data so simply adding that to Vuescan wouldn't be of any
interest to me, any more than the sharpening and grain reduction
features in VS are of interest. I already have a photo editor.
I don't know if the Vuescan method will yield worthwhile results, but
playing with it is of interest to me.

I think there may be a misunderstanding of what's going on here.

According to Bart (even though he tried his best to obfuscate) what
Vuescan appears to do is present one image to set the Curves, but then
applies the Curves to a totally different image!

That's not a method, that's a bug. I just don't see how that can be of
any use?

If you want to apply curves to a gamma 1.0 version of the image you
can do that in any image editor. That's known as editing the image in
linear gamma. For more details check:

http://www.aim-dtp.net/

Don.

 

[Don]

Don wrote: "- The program presents one image (gamma 2.2) for the user
to determine
the settings.
- The program then applies these settings to a *totally different*
image (gamma 1.0, B&W points, etc).
That's a canonical definition of a *bug*! "

Only to you, sweetie.

Oh, come on, Roger. Are you serious? Assuming 8-bit for simplicity:

Let's say you want to set a curve point to 128 in gamma 2.2 image.

The corresponding place in the gamma 1.0 image is (off the top of my
head) at 56.

If Bart is to be believed, this Vuescan bug will then merrily apply
the curve with the setting of 128 to an image where the corresponding
data is at 56!? That's a BUG!

Also, weren't you the one who posted the stuff from AMP about benefits
of gamma 1.0 editing?

Yes, but this Vuescan bug has nothing to do with gamma 1.0 editing.

Linear (gamma 1.0) editing means you use linear image to select the
settings and then apply them to the *same* linear image.

This Vuescan bug (according to Bart) uses gamma 2.2 image to select
the settings, but then it applies them to gamma 1.0 image, as
explained above. That's a bug!

Don.