The only way to exit is to kill the process from Task Manager. The problem happens in PS CC This seems a lot to pay just to fix the problem with the plugin. As I don't use my scanner much these days, I'm not really interested in the other changes between Ai 8 and 9.
I tried contacting Lasersoft but no response. Their forum appears to be defunct - no postings later than I've been using SilverFast for years now, bundled with my Plustek , and always had truly terrible results.
No matter what setting, no matter what I adjust, full auto mode or manual, every slide and negative was either mediocre or just awful. Colours were all over the place, dynamic range was non-existent, scan lines everywhere on difficult negatives. Professionals may know how to use this software but I don't.
Then recently I discovered VueScan, and in full auto mode I get perfect results, both from positive or negative film, and it scans much faster. I've done side-by-side comparisons in auto mode for both applications, and SilverFast is consistently so awful, that I wonder if this software isn't built on joke code.
I've wasted hundreds of hours scanning old photos and now realised why so many of them looked terrible. Many comments online indicate I am not alone in my view of SilverFast I'm now up to version 8. Interesting, i use Silverfast and tried Vuescan some time ago, maybe i give it another go, back then the software felt more confusing compared to Silverfast, so thats a bit surprising to read here.
But Vuescan always has the advantage that one can use it with evry scanner and the price seems to have gone lower. Oh and another thing: i felt the Silverfast Scans actually cold, thats why I change the White Balance usually afterwards in Lightroom, normally thats the only thing i change there.
Been using Silverfast 8. There are a few nice features in V9, but it still has some significant issues. The algorithm used to match the infrared scan's grayscale mask to the image is easily confused. There is a lame way to adjust the offsets. Lasersoft's support is breathtakingly awful. It's shameful.
I've reported 1 and received no reply for 2 weeks, despite follow-ups. Finally, an apology reply from "Boris" who claims he is new. That was on March 3rd; they've not replied since. Meanwhile, the crashes continue, sometimes more than a dozen per roll of film I've devised some workarounds.
Dozens of wasted hours. We apparently screwed up here. Would you PM me your email address or ticket number so I can take a look at your support request and possibly speed things up for you and others. Please accept my apologies and thanks for your response - Jan.
Will investigate this now and report back here and via email. I am having a similar experience, with a different technical issue. The first time I needed help, there was a delay then someone named "boris" apologized and finally responded. This time, there has been no response and the current ticket was submitted 1 month ago. At this point, the word 'refund' is coming to mind. There are third-party resources at least for SilverFast 8 and Vuescan.
I don't think reviews like this can do justice to the options and the differences between these products. They have trial periods - download, try and decide based on your own needs and preferences. Finally, the scanner era is ending. Truly high quality equipment has vanished except for some supply in the resale market and the options for digitizing film using cameras have been growing a lot.
This is the way forward for all of us with decades of film waiting to be digitized efficiently - buy some accessories and the right copy lens and use a camera.
I don't unterstand the results of this "review". Looking at the pictures, Silverfast delivers the best result by far. Better sharpness, better dust and scratch removal.
Please answer two questions. Why there are only 2 commercial softwares for film scanning? Vuescan and Silverfast. Why only Vuescan supports Raspberry pi? Is it connected with OSes, technology etc.? Regards, Alex. A lot of the time we develop VueScan based on customer requests, and also if we can get the API's from the manufacturer. If you have any request at all just let us know I'd go with Silverfast based on the sample scans you posted.
Silverfast seems to be the only one which gives you fine detail. You can change color later, but you can't add detail later, and sharpening film scans is way trickier than with digitally captured images.
The detail is limited by the scanner's hardware, not the software. You can't get blood from a turnip. I have seen other reviews where indeed some software can use the hardware to produce a better result than others.
Is this not also true of RAW converters? Yes, rpjallan, I think you're right and I think Alan2dpreview is also making a valid point. There are limitations in the hardware that you just won't exceed with any software, period. I used to use the Polaroid sprintscan and the Nikon supercool scann I preferred using the Polaroid actually no banding in the shadows, the Nikon was problematic there it made beautiful scans worthy of beautiful 24x36 prints with my Epson , on smooth fine art papers.
I now using my EM1II and 60 mm macro with aperture set to f5. Vuescan is vastly superior for reasons the reviewer does not emphasize.
Its cost is reasonable for what you get for the pro version--lifetime and frequent updates, great support, works with virtually every scanner there is, works well. Compare that Silverfast which, putting aside its performance, is very expensive to start with and requires a new license for each separate scanner you have or Epson which works with Epson scanners.
There is no comparison. Thanks David. Yes - we are over 20 years old and have customers who have been with us for all that time.. Silverfast has a very complex and difficult interface. It is also expensive and one has to buy a different version for each scanner which is outrageous.
It can be quite slow and badly needs an update. Vuescan always works and is easy to use and is fast. It works easily with every scanner i have tried. The easiest and very fast way to copy slides is with the nikon d and the relevant slide copying attachment and a led studio light. Scanners are way too slow for this. Results are excellent and if one has difficult slides simply do them HDR. Topaz sharpenAI also is great for fixing soft slides.
Shoot with the emulsion side to the camera and then reverse the slide in Lightroom for absolutely accurate focus. I use a Nikon LS I have used VueScan for years. I have no comparisons other than the original Nikon software which no longer works with Apple. It looks fine and does everything I need. Price and support is wonderful.
Noting works perfectly with just pushing "scan". I found similar results. I found that my Epson Pro scanner needs a lot of care and feeding to ensure that the holders are at the correct distance. Totally concur that Silverfast is like SAS Software accounting stuff : You vill do it our vay or you vill not do it at all.
VueScan still has some cruft, It's often hard to reset to defaults and if you don't have that baked into your muscle memory you can screw things up royally. When all is said and done, for my 35mm back catalog that I'm working on during this coronabollocks here on the frozen ice planet of Hoth, I went back to my Nikon Scan on my venerable and very reliable Windows Vista Machine to drive my Coolscan VI ED.
Everything is stored as NEF. Happy to take any product suggestions for VueScan. A lot of our development work is comments from customers. You can do that from our website. Very good that DPR has published such a test! Personally I however do not yet need a new scanner software as Silverfast in for free! That program was years ago "bundled" with my CanoScan F, and was now replaced with a slightly newer version, working well with Win7 and Win10 pro.
Interface is ugly but the results are beautiful. CP is a plugin that woks with Photoshop or PhotoLine. I found that I get better results when used with PhotoLine also German.
I guess this review of the three main scanning apps in the world is much like any other that can be written: There will be pros and cons and complaints and praises associated with all three, depending very much on the scanner and on what's being scanned. Pick the one you like the most or the one you dislike the least. Perhaps the only really silly thing about this review is the complaint that Epson Scan occupies too much screen area when multiple panels are open and displayed simultaneously.
Well of course that will happen, so don't keep them all open and displayed simultaneously! Why would someone need to? I have all three bits of software and generally agree with the comments in the article. The amount the Epson software crops is severe to the point of being a bug in my opinion. Silverfast is just ridiculously complex but if you take the time to set up a batch scan you can apply changes to individual frames including the crop.
Where I probably disagree with the article the most is the over the Vuescan interface comments. I think it's pretty rubbish to be honest and way out of date. It's drop downs and numerical values and not what you expect on modern software. Sometimes it can give the best results but I tend to end up gravitating back to Silverfast despite the fact I virtually have to re-learn it every time I use it!
Dave If you find the automatic crops too severe, you can do them manually and scan a little of the film holder. Then crop the scanned result. Additional historical footnote. OK, if we're being honest here, the user interfaces of all 3 are awful. I say this as a former UX designer. Epson and Vuescan were designed by engineers for sure. I mostly use Vuescan, but for dealing with a visual medium, using sliders and numerical input is just painful. And I've never been able to figure out how to scan multiple frames at once.
But I will give them the nod on supporting old scanners my Coolscan IV for example Really though, they could all use a major UI overhaul. Yes - VueScan designed by Ed Hamrick.
He is an engineer and ex NASA. So we can't argue :- BUT - we are aware that the UI needs improving - and we have made some changes already. Happy to take any suggestions.. Refreshing to see this review! Excellent bang for the buck and it drives the old Nikon scanners very well. Regarding differences between scan programs, you can't get blood from a turnip. The scanner provides the scan basically limited by the min Dmax. All the edits are done after the scan.
Unless they're applied equally and knowledgeably, there will always seem to be differences between the scanner programs. But that's operator's error, not the software or scanner.
I'm surprised the author dissed Epson Scan for its auto-cropping. I happen to be scanning some older negatives at the moment, and to select custom crop, in the Preview panel select "Normal" instead of "Thumbnail" and you'll see your strips of film scanned with no separations.
Then just crop the first frame as you like presumably showing a bit of frame edge , then click on the copy button and use the copied frame to crop your next frame. Repeat for all your frames. If you have auto-numbering enabled, the first frame you crop will be the first-numbered frame in your scans.
Just as you wouldn't choose auto-exposure for your scan settings, why would you leave cropping to the program? I tried Silverfast, but gave up. Possibly the most obtuse piece of software I've ever used. Just went back to Epson Scan 2. The author dismissed it as sharpening, but in the car-museum shot you can read the words on the sign in the background only in the SilverFast scan.
I hate all these programs. They were all developed many years ago, and haven't received major updates for years. Silverfast is especially a hot pile of garbage. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? It's pretty clear that you either don't use these products at all or haven't done so in years. Thanks for the updated info - just for those who might not know, there is also a slide adapter that you can use to hold your slide and take a picture with your rig. It's not a high dpi drum scan, but certainly will give you a basic jpg like a Nikon ES-2 that you can then decide if you want to bother with a time intensive scan.
A lot of those old slides weren't all that sharp to begin with. If you have a film negative, your film is already archived. Keep it in a cool dark, dry place. Yes, but when you're downsizing, as I am, all that physical stuff has to go. Besided my own slides and negs, I inherited thousands of slides and negs from my parents and grandparents. Just ran out of room, so I digitized and disposed. If you want to preserve film photos, store them properly and have a disaster preparedness plan. Digital preservation of your digital assets like born-digital photos and scans of film is another matter entirely.
Archiving is actually more about organizing and describing your materials for access. If you want to write an article about archiving your film photos, it would be about that! And if you don't have a cool dry dark place I 'saved' my collection 18k at the time using a neg scanner and Vuescan in its earliest days.
Portra is a little easier, but generally, you're right, which is why I shoot chromes. You know immediately if you nailed the exposure and scanning is easier. I am sorry for your experience. I have a completely different view from transposing film images to digital. First, there is no true color. Each film and paper had and still have a distinctive color rendering. We always had few options to work with, with some tweaks in process. Digital photography gives us much more power to control color, contrast, shadows rendering, masks and else.
In few minutes we can do work that could take days in a lab, with almost limitless control. So I don't mind spending some time treating a scanned image, I am actually pleased with the process when I compare with what it takes to calibrate the chemicals and internegatives, deal with crossed curves, make masks Choosing the right emulsion for the job used to be part of the photographers responsibility back in the analogue days.
Archiving your negative Scans with Auto-Level everything turned on and baked into the file is just wrong. If I got a commercial scanner like some models from noritsu koki I won't complain at all.
Profiling RGB curves is very time consuming and just not worth it unless you shoot in controlled lighting conditions at large. So I love the looking of film when I got it right but as a hobbyist I'm not sure should I spend my time into it.
The key word here is hobbyist. For this category of photographer there still are commercial labs doing good quality negative scans. Whoever dares to make it themselves must study and learn the techniques, plus get tips from more specialized pros, like what we got in the present great review.
Wether printing, scanning, digital processing or even in the traditional lab, they must educate themselves to the level of advanced amateur to make it worth all time and money invested. Education is also a great commodity, by which someone would refrain from lowering the debate level in quite a specific forum.
Better measure for someone who knows so little is to keep silent, pay attention and allow space for those who can share useful information.
Actually it's not that complicated nor does it take so-called "professional" skill to do it right, because even the professional relies on commercial solution. A friend of mine runs film processing service so I have the luck to actually try his gadget and I can tell you there's huge gap between commercial solution and the consumer one, to be more clear the commercial solution software is bundled with it's hardware, that's why I think comparing retail scanning software miss the point.
By the way, I really hope to leave some useful information rather than hollow debates, but those films I'd recommend discontinued long time ago so maybe inevitably this topic will end as another hollow debate. I feel flattered to be compared to the great late Michael Reichmann! Needless to mention his importance in the early transition to digital era. I am just an old photographer from a developing country, where I ran a pioneer Photo Gallery in the early 's, then owned a laboratory for professionals, acting as technical director.
I promoted fine art printing, preservation, taught Zone System and freely acted as a technical advisor to my customers. I curated about a dozen exhibitions, not counting my own.
One of these was shown in the Rencontres d'Arles I also was on the board for one important Art Museum photo collection. I tell you, I enjoy to see how accessible photography has become, so that anybody can intuitively process and control images with no knowledge of all the technical background we needed so few time ago.
Scanning may be tricky for many people, but if you start from a simple, correctly controlled scan front any decent commercial lab, you have an open highway to control image quality fit to your expression style in a way that no conventional photochemical lab can.
I've found that VueScan Professional has completely met my scanning needs for many many years. The software is continuously being updated at no charge!
Customer support has been very responsive. Yes, you do have to make friends with it but once that's done the results are terrific. I'm currently scanning my aircraft slide collection using a PowerSlide scanner.
The image quality is outstanding and the scanner supports batch processing up to at a time. One item that the author of the comparison missed is that you DON'T have to cancel images one by one if you're batch processing with SilverFast. With other applications I could crop each photo and then scan each one in one go.
The first time I used Vuescan I was disappointed to find when I tried to crop a second photo the crop on the first disappeared, and I had to scan each photo separately. Perhaps someone else is able to use this feature better than I have been able to and can offer a few pointers!
I think that will solve your multiple scan areas. Hi; Have you had a chance to look at the latest version of VueScan [9. Yes, I have. Vuescan is updated regularly, so not much have change from the version I used. Here is my experience. I ran the i1 profiler which is only available on the Epson Scan [due to the restricted bundled licensing I gather]. Using the bundled IT8 reflective and transmissive targets [that came with the i1 software] I ran 20 tests [so far] with different settings using Epson Scan, Vue Scan [9.
I am using a desktop iMac using MacOS My methodology, though not necessarily professional robust or exhaustive, was to open each file in Photoshop, and compare the RGB values of the white-points, mid-points, and black-points. A bit of googling tells me that upgrading to Catalina requires a new driver which Epson, in their attempt to make me buy a new scanner, have decided to no longer do. I am considering going down the Vuescan route.
My previous scanner, A Canon, came with Vuescan included which I used regularly at the time, until the scanner broke down.
Hope you can help,. Many thanks for that Bo. Once I get used to it then should I need to get a new scanner I should be able to use VueScan with it and not have another learning curve to face. Anyway, I hope you are getting up and running with Vuescan, it is a nice piece of software. And works with most scanners.
However I was able to install the upgraded drivers from the Epson Website which would have resolved the issue. I did have a further problem though — i was still getting the same error message but it was not the software — it was the fact that the moving lock switch on the back of the unit was on!
I had forgotten it was even there so that may help John also. Thanks for the review of the 3 softwares — the Epson software was driving me crazy with the continued rescanning and failure to recognise borders and I had lost my Silverfast Serial number so I am definitely leaning towards VueScan.
Hello I found your comparison of scanner software useful- so thanks for that. This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to our Privacy Policy. VueScan vs Silverfast. Popular Course in this category.
Course Price View Course. Free Design Course. Login details for this Free course will be emailed to you. Email ID. Contact No. It is image scanning as well as processing software that works especially for photographs and their negatives. It is also image processing and scanning software and includes the processing of documents, slides, and other photos. It was developed by Hamrick Software Ed Hamrick, David Hamrick in , 23 years ago for image scanning and processing purpose.
In , 26 years ago it was initially developed and its developer was LaserSoft Imaging. On December 23, , its latest or current stable version was released and named as 8. You can run it on different operating systems which makes it compatible with different systems and these are Windows XP and its later versions, Mac OS X
0コメント