Vuescan with Minolta SE 5400

[Matthew Dranchak]

I have recently installed a SE 5400. I am presently using the DiMage
software to do the scanning of 35mm slides and film.
I have been reading this newsgroup and following the threads of all that
have been posted about Vuescan when used with the SE 5400.
With my previous computer (Windows SE) and scanner (very early model DiMage
Dual Scan, SCSI ) I used Vuescan with reasonable results but was very
limited, especially without ICE, due to the age of my slides and the dust
associated.

My questions to those of you who have been using Vuescan with the SE 5400
are these:
How well does it (Vuescan) perform?
Is it slower than the DiMage software?
Does it hang up at times like the DiMage software? ( I have finally found
out what to avoid)
Does it have a comparable quick scan feature?

Do the problems that I have read about really exist?
Does it produce extraneous lines on scanned images?

I have scanned (Using Dimage software) one slide in as many different
combinations of resolution, and saved image formats to get a feel of the
results and the saved file sizes. I hope to put together a table and some
image references for my web page for viewing.
My last look at the Vuescan Web page has been some time ago so I will be
re-doing that real soon.
Any comments will be appreciated very much.
If I can answer some of your questions on what I have done so far, I will be
glad to help.

Matt D

 

[Wilfred]

I have recently installed a SE 5400. I am presently using the DiMage
software to do the scanning of 35mm slides and film.
I have been reading this newsgroup and following the threads of all that
have been posted about Vuescan when used with the SE 5400.
With my previous computer (Windows SE) and scanner (very early model DiMage
Dual Scan, SCSI ) I used Vuescan with reasonable results but was very
limited, especially without ICE, due to the age of my slides and the dust
associated.

My questions to those of you who have been using Vuescan with the SE 5400
are these:
How well does it (Vuescan) perform?
Is it slower than the DiMage software?

It depends. It allows you to scan with ICE on and the grain dissolver
on, which is not possible with the Scan Utility. Scanning with the grain
dissolver off is much faster. Otherwise, scan times are comparable, I'd
say. There may be some quantitative tests out in the Internet; maybe
you'll find something here: http://tinyurl.com/439g4

Does it hang up at times like the DiMage software? ( I have finally found
out what to avoid)

I never experienced this, but I'm not a Windows user.

Does it have a comparable quick scan feature?

Not as far as I know.

Do the problems that I have read about really exist?

As far as I know, there are three problems: (1) VueScan doesn't fully
use the scanner's density range, (2) some people have reported
streaking, (3) IR cleaning (VueScan's implementation of the ICE
hardware) doesn't always work properly. According to Ed Hamrick, these
problems are all related to the way VueScan calibrates the scanner. He
says he is currently working on the problem.

 

[Fernando Carello]

My questions to those of you who have been using Vuescan with the SE 5400
are these:
How well does it (Vuescan) perform?

Mixed bag. It has features that you won't find in Minolta Scan Utility, but
it also has some image quality issues.

Is it slower than the DiMage software?

No. If anything, is a bit faster because the AF algorythm is faster (so it
starts scanning earlier than Minolta Scan Utility). It also looses less time
to initialize and so.

Does it hang up at times like the DiMage software? ( I have finally found
out what to avoid)

No: it's rock-solid in my experience.

Does it have a comparable quick scan feature?

I don't really understand what is a quick scan... you mean a Prescan? It has
a Preview that is very similar to Minolta's Prescan.

Do the problems that I have read about really exist?
Does it produce extraneous lines on scanned images?

Yes, in my experience. They are visible and annoying, when you want to
really extract the maximum details from your film (scanning at 5400 dpi and
proper unsharp masking afterwards).
Those lines aren't visible when scanning with Minolta Scan Utility (at 5400
dpi and with the same amount of sharpening afterwards)

Bye!

Fernando

 

[r. stechert]

I have recently installed a SE 5400. I am presently using the DiMage
software to do the scanning of 35mm slides and film.
I have been reading this newsgroup and following the threads of all that
have been posted about Vuescan when used with the SE 5400.
With my previous computer (Windows SE) and scanner (very early model DiMage
Dual Scan, SCSI ) I used Vuescan with reasonable results but was very
limited, especially without ICE, due to the age of my slides and the dust
associated.

My questions to those of you who have been using Vuescan with the SE 5400
are these:
How well does it (Vuescan) perform?

I`m testing right now. Its faster (4:20 for a full 5400 scan with
ICE+grain reducer compared to 8:10 with the Minolta SW)

Is it slower than the DiMage software?
Does it hang up at times like the DiMage software? ( I have finally found
out what to avoid)

Rock solid. But I don´t have problems with the Minolta SW either
(Vers. 1.15 / Bios 1.10)

Does it have a comparable quick scan feature?

No index scan, but prescan like the M. SW

Do the problems that I have read about really exist?
Does it produce extraneous lines on scanned images?

I found discrete lines in ICE Scans without grain red. which disappear
when the grain red. was on. Then the images look like the ones from
the M.-SW. But these discrete lines were only visible at a factor of
300 in Photoshop, which means an output format of 7,2 meters X 10,8
meters (sitting 50cm in front of the monitor). I don´t know wether
this matters. Not for me. But before scanning I initialized normally
with the minolta software. Might be a difference.

I have scanned (Using Dimage software) one slide in as many different
combinations of resolution, and saved image formats to get a feel of the
results and the saved file sizes. I hope to put together a table and some
image references for my web page for viewing.
My last look at the Vuescan Web page has been some time ago so I will be
re-doing that real soon.
Any comments will be appreciated very much.
If I can answer some of your questions on what I have done so far, I will be
glad to help.

Matt D

For me it looks like a nice peace of scanning-software. You can make a
full 5400 Ice raw-scan (64rgbi) to file in 2:20 per slide for a
certain numbers of slides in the evening. Afterwards converting these
from file to file to 48rgb with filters or what ever you want over
night. Thats relative fast.

I think I will buy it.

Roland St.

 

[Mendel Leisk]

It depends. It allows you to scan with ICE on and the grain dissolver
on, which is not possible with the Scan Utility. Scanning with the grain
dissolver off is much faster. Otherwise, scan times are comparable, I'd
say. There may be some quantitative tests out in the Internet; maybe
you'll find something here: http://tinyurl.com/439g4

Mathew there's a typo above, I think. Should read:

"with ICE on and the grain dissolver OFF"?

 

[Mike G.]

I'm still on VueScan 7.6.81. Have not had any of the problems others
have experienced, and am reluctant to upgrade cause it ain't broken.
Guess I'm one of the lucky ones.

One thing others did not mention, and which for my workflow is a MAJOR
factor, is that when using a Twain interface scan utility, like the
Minolta utility (and virtually all others, too), it locks up your
machine while the scan is taking place, i.e. for minutes at a time.
With ViewScan, however, not being a Twain compliant program, I have
total use of my machine while the scan is taking place, and generally
have Photoshop and ViewScan running together. That way, I can use the
several minutes that occur during a scan to be tweaking the previous
scan in Photoshop. To me, this results in am immense improvement in
efficiency.

 

[Wilfred]

Mathew there's a typo above, I think. Should read:

"with ICE on and the grain dissolver OFF"?

Of course, you're right. My apologies.