Problem with Nikon Coolscan 4000 (compared to Polaroid Sprintscan)

[Mike]

At my college, I scanned some old family slides of mine. I had two
choices for scanners: a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 and a Polaroid
Sprintscan 4000. I chose the Nikon because it had Digital ICE/GEM/ROC.

The scanners were connected to a Mac, and I scanned at 14-bit 4000 DPI.
On the Mac, they seemed to look ok.

For one of the slides, I decided to scan it in the Polaroid as well to
compare.

When I got home to my PC, I compared the scans and the Nikon scans look
pretty bad. Here is a comparison (reduced resolution for web):

Nikon: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/vietnam_crew_nikon.jpg

Polaroid: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/vietnam_crew_polaroid.jpg

The Polaroid looks superior to me. I can't seem to adjust the colors of
the Nikon scan in Photoshop to look right.

And then this Nikon scan has a weird yellow color:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/dad_50cal_nikon.jpg

Can anything be done with my Nikon scans? I spent a few hours scanning
and hate to redo them (in which I would choose the Polaroid).

Thanks,
Mike

 

[Gregory W Blank]

Can anything be done with my Nikon scans? I spent a few hours scanning
and hate to redo them (in which I would choose the Polaroid).

There are focus issues as well, redo them. Something is wrong with
the Nikon scanner.
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

 

[Christoph Breitkopf]

At my college, I scanned some old family slides of mine. I had two

If those were Kodachrome slides, switch off ICE/GEM/ROC.
ICE does not work with Kodachrome, and if you leave it on
_and_ switch on GEM and ROC, too, you can get very weird effects.

Regards,
Chris

 

[coxtale]

Your problem looks very similar to the one described here:
http://www.vad1.com/photo/dirty-scanner/

My Polaroid SS4000 has this problem to a degree, but never anything like
your Nikon scan.

 

[Kennedy McEwen]

At my college, I scanned some old family slides of mine. I had two
choices for scanners: a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 and a Polaroid
Sprintscan 4000. I chose the Nikon because it had Digital ICE/GEM/ROC.

Can anything be done with my Nikon scans? I spent a few hours scanning
and hate to redo them (in which I would choose the Polaroid).

The Nikon scanner optics are filthy and need to be cleaned.

Do not waste your time using that scanner until this cleaning has been
undertaken.

 

[ThomasH]

At my college, I scanned some old family slides of mine. I had two
choices for scanners: a Nikon Super Coolscan 4000 and a Polaroid
Sprintscan 4000. I chose the Nikon because it had Digital ICE/GEM/ROC.

The scanners were connected to a Mac, and I scanned at 14-bit 4000 DPI.
On the Mac, they seemed to look ok.

For one of the slides, I decided to scan it in the Polaroid as well to
compare.

When I got home to my PC, I compared the scans and the Nikon scans look
pretty bad. Here is a comparison (reduced resolution for web):

Nikon: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/vietnam_crew_nikon.jpg

Polaroid: http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/vietnam_crew_polaroid.jpg

The Polaroid looks superior to me. I can't seem to adjust the colors of
the Nikon scan in Photoshop to look right.

Actually, I disagree in this case: Other that being too dark,
skin color and the color of the ship look *much* more natural
in the Nikon scan to me! The Polaroid scan has a weird color
balance. All shadow areas are intensely blue and the skin of
the crew looks very artificial, with its nasty magenta cast.
It looks like the green component is missing.

Besides, this slide looks different. The polaroid scan
suggests that the slide is in a cardboard mount, the Nikon
scan seems to be made with the slide in some sort of a
film holder, correct?

If you use NikonScan, you can use curves to elevate the
detail in shadow. Adjust black point accordingly to keep
darker shadows around 0,0,0 (rgb).

And then this Nikon scan has a weird yellow color:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~mikem/vietnam/dad_50cal_nikon.jpg

This looks overexposed, damaged in highlight. But we lack detail
to pass a judgment.

a) What slide material is it?
b) Are you using ICE/GEM?
c) Is this slide faded, are you using ROC, what are the settings?

Scanning is not easy, its not a "plug and play." I think that
we all needed a learning curve to achieve good results.

Thomas

 

[Mike]

Your problem looks very similar to the one described here:
http://www.vad1.com/photo/dirty-scanner/

Thanks for all the replies. My hunch is that the scanner optics are
indeed dirty.

The slides are Kodak Ektachrome. GEM and ROC was enabled with settings of
something like 3 and 5 respectively.