Good scans from nikonscan not so silverfast

[Fraser]

Thought I would fire up an old PC and try NikonScan as I seem to remember before I started using Silverfast my colour negs seemed to need much less post processing, sure enough I get much better scans from Nikonscan. Silverfast just seems overly complicated or am I doing something wrong. Has anyone got some basic settings for silverfast maybe I need to start again?
Cheers.

 

[willie_901]

Silverfast drove me crazy.

I suggest you spend some time with the trial version of VueScan. The trial version applies a watermark until you purchase a liscense.

 

[Bob Michaels]

What is your definition of a "good scan"? The one that comes straight from the scanner software with no adjustments? Or, the one that yields the best results after appropriate post processing adjustments? They may be quite different.

The scanner manufacturer's software such as Nikonscan with built in non-reversible adjustments usually results in the best initial looking scans. But the best final results usually come from scanner software such as Vuescan (my choice for almost 20 years) or Silverfast which give you the most initial complete data that you manipulate yourself into final.

It's similar to believing your digital camera using auto focus, auto f-stop, auto shutter speed, auto ISO, and auto internal adjustments can deliver JPGs better than you can do yourself with post processing. Sometimes almost as good but never better.

FWIW, I am one who always chooses the easiest and simplest way to achieve the best final results. But that is never the scanner manufacturer's software.

 

[Richard G]

I loved Nikonscan. Many Macs ago. I actually still have the one that ran it... Maybe I should revive.

 

[RObert Budding]

I really liked NikonScan, but the drivers are unsigned, and there was nothing that I tried that worked under Windows 10 (I did have it working with earlier versions of Win 10). So I have Silverfast now. It's over-engineered, but I'm getting used to it.

 

[jawarden]

Bob is right. Scanner software is best used to get you to the starting line rather than the finish line.

 

[JohnBeeching]

Another vote for Bob's approach. Capture as much information as you can at the scanning stage and then work on the scan in the processing stage to achieve the desired image.

 

[PRJ]

After beating on a Nikon scanner for almost two decades I'd say the best approach is to use Vuescan for black and white and NikonScan for color. I was never a fan of NikonScan's interface but the results are pretty dang good right out of the box for color. I never liked Silverfast. Never thought it was worth the money.

I am a Mac user so when I want to do a good scan in color I have to whip out an old Powerbook to run NikonScan. Bit of a pain but worth it.

 

[Fraser]

Thats the way I Scan get as much info from the neg then move over to camera raw. But as already said I think silverfast is far to complicated and compared to Nikon Scan which was nice and simple. But I don't want to go back to using windows so my options are limited.

 

[charjohncarter]

Swift 1 has a tutorial on post processing color films. His is to be used with Epson software, but I'm sure both software that you mentioned could be adapted with minor emendation.

http://www.coltonallen.com/getting-the-most-from-color-negative-film-with-your-epson-flatbed/

 

[daniel b]

I really liked NikonScan, but the drivers are unsigned, and there was nothing that I tried that worked under Windows 10 (I did have it working with earlier versions of Win 10). So I have Silverfast now. It's over-engineered, but I'm getting used to it.

Hi Robert,
I am currently using NikonScan with a Coolscan LS9000 and latest version of W10, with unsigned drivers. If you want to know more, send a note.