Alternative Software for Nikon Scanner

[Bike Tourist]

I've had a Nikon Coolscan V ED for many years. I like its quality scans and it seems well-built. Now, that it's no longer made, I'm even more appreciative. But . . .

The software stinks! Every time Nikon releases a new build of Nikon Scan I hope that they've finally got it right. But, no, not so far. I cannot sometimes get two or three scans before it crashes or freezes up or produces scans with lines across the short dimension. A quick reboot and maybe I can get ten in a row but never more than that.

Does anyone have a (good) experience with alternative software using the Coolscan hardware?

 

[Ronald_H]

Ed Hamrick's Vuescan. Google. Been using it for 8 years and counting.

You'll find some detractors here, but I laugh at them with scorn 😉

It does not have a fancy UI and the settings at your disposal might overwhelm you at first but rest assured that it will help to squeeze everything out of your scanner.

I progressed from an Epson 1200 Perfection Photo, to a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II to a Nikon Coolscan V and it works brilliantly with all of them, and with all of them it is way better than the bundled software.

B/W scanning and post processing is a bit of a challenge, just don't blame Vuescan.

 

[dexdog]

I personally have not had any problems running Nikon Scan on a Vista PC platform, but can second what previous poster says concerning Vuescan- works great on the Coolscan V.

 

[jmkelly]

I have used Vuescan but ended up with Silverfast Ai - which also supports the Coolscan V. I can't recommend Silverfast for everyone - my particular installation was not a pain-free experience. But once I got it running I found that its workflow just feels more natural to me than Vuescan did. YMMV.

 

[Tuolumne]

Try Silverfast SE Plus. Really really good.

/T

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I'm having nothing but good fortune with Vuescan, after a few weeks with my 5000ED.

 

[sbramin]

silver fast / vuescan seem even more archaic then nikon scan.


nikon scan has crashed perhaps four times in year of use and each time it was because of very curved negatives or negatives that were cut and didn't fill the frame. the scanner got confused by this.

otherwise it runs perfectly, osx 10.5.6 and earlier.

could be something wrong with your scanner or your computer.

 

[Bike Tourist]

Thanks all. Nothing wrong with the scanner or the computer. I think I'll try Vuescan first.

 

[pipal]

Thanks all. Nothing wrong with the scanner or the computer. I think I'll try Vuescan first.

So you'll try it, good. It has a bit different approach, but it works well once you get accustomed to it. Have a look at this tutorial, it can help you a bit:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157608204093047/

Martin

 

[John Shriver]

Both Vuescan and SilverFast have free downloads you can try for 30 days. This is important, since both programs are subject to regressions, perhaps more so with Vuescan, where a new version breaks support for a particular scanner. I think that both are equally capable of good results, but I prefer the UI of SilverFast.

Have you updated the firmware in the scanner itself?

Have you tried different USB connections to the computer? I had all sorts of strange problems trying to run the Coolscan IV through a USB hub. Use a different USB port on the computer. Add a PCI USB 2.0 card, perhaps it is better than the one built into your machine.

You might also want to make a boot CD-ROM with memtest86 on it (from the Linux community). Let it check the DRAM of the machine for a day. Lots of PC's have terrible flaky memory problems that are only exposed by stressful programs.

Of course, if your machine is infested with viruses or malware, any software will be unreliable on it.

 

[MCTuomey]

along the thinking of John, try running your 5000 using firewire. i now do so with my 4000. much happier.

 

[Bob Michaels]

I think I'll try Vuescan first.

Download the free demo. It has everything the full version does except except for the ability to profile your scanner.

Make sure you are not seeking scans that look good. You want a scan that becomes the best print or file after adjusting in your image editor. That means capturing the maximum amount of data in the scan phase. Your scan will probably look flat. That's better for the scan phase. Do your adjustments in your image editor where you have better control and can undo them.

There are many adjustments in Vuescan. They are there for those who do not want to later use an image editor. You can ignore the majority of them. Just make sure the ends of the histogram are not clipped. That will mean there is data lost that can never be recovered.

Never overwrite your original scan TIF. Save it in case you want to go back later.

When you do decide to purchase Vuescan, make sure you pay the extra to get unlimited upgrades. I paid $35 or $45 about seven years ago. It was one of the best deals I ever make.

 

[kevin m]

Do either Vuescan or Silverfast actually make better scans or is it just that they offer a better workflow?

 

[Bob Michaels]

Do either Vuescan or Silverfast actually make better scans or is it just that they offer a better workflow?

My measure of a better scan is one that captures the maximum amount of data from the neg. That is not necessarily the better looking scan. In that regard, Vuescan (& possibly Silverfast, do not have first hand experience) does give you a better scan because it is completely manual to where it does not make any adjustments to the original scan.

Remember the hardware of the scanner just captures the basic raw data from the shadow of the light source through the neg as it falls on the scan sensor. All the conversion into something meaningful is done by the scanner software or driver (Nikonscan, Minoltascan, Vuescan, Silverfast) Vuescan (& possibly Silverfast) will give you the most unmanipulated data. I don't want the scanner software to start setting endpoints for me. I just want the basic data so I can do it myself.

A crude, and inexact, analogy is a RAW file vs. a JPG from a digital camera. It is the "let me do it myself, I know how I want it" thinking.

 

[icebear]

I'm also using vuescan. Pretty much from the start after I got the scanner (Coolscan V) I switched the vuescan because the Nikon software gave me a lot of trouble.

 

[wintoid]

along the thinking of John, try running your 5000 using firewire. i now do so with my 4000. much happier.

Unfortunately, I don't think the 5000 supports Firewire

 

[Harry Lime]

The software stinks! Every time Nikon releases a new build of Nikon Scan I hope that they've finally got it right. But, no, not so far. I cannot sometimes get two or three scans before it crashes or freezes up or produces scans with lines across the short dimension. A quick reboot and maybe I can get ten in a row but never more than that.

That is very odd. I've used Nikonscan for several years with a 5000ED and 9000ED on a Mac. No problems, works like a charm.

What sort of system are you running it on?

 

[Bike Tourist]

You all have given me much to think about. Yesterday, as if to make me a liar, I scanned ten negs at 4000 dpi using NikonScan with no problems.

Here is what I'm running:

OS Name Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
Version 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 Build 2600
OS Manufacturer Microsoft Corporation
System Name 12-11-05
System Manufacturer HP Pavilion 061
System Model PX191AV-ABA d4100e
System Type X86-based PC
Processor x86 Family 15 Model 43 Stepping 1 AuthenticAMD ~1989 Mhz
BIOS Version/Date Phoenix Technologies, LTD 3.13, 11/15/2005
SMBIOS Version 2.4
Windows Directory C:\WINDOWS
System Directory C:\WINDOWS\system32
Boot Device \Device\HarddiskVolume2
Locale United States
Hardware Abstraction Layer Version = "5.1.2600.5512 (xpsp.080413-2111)"
User Name 12-11-05\HP_Owner
Time Zone Pacific Standard Time
Total Physical Memory 2,048.00 MB
Available Physical Memory 1.48 GB
Total Virtual Memory 2.00 GB
Available Virtual Memory 1.96 GB
Page File Space 3.85 GB
Page File C:\pagefile.sys

Good grief! My computer's already three years old!

 

[kevin m]

My measure of a better scan is one that captures the maximum amount of data from the neg.

Mine, too. Thanks for the detailed reply. 🙂