How to downgrade Mac Mini OS to run Nikon Coolscan 9000 original software

[Robert Stone]

Hi,

I'm looking to find the right place to downgrade my old Mac mini to use the best Mac OS that will run Nikon's original Coolscan software for my 9000 ED

I hear that VueScan is wonderful but it's $400 for a license and the Nikon one is free AND I have an old Mac mini. SO I'm trying to go that rout if possible.

Any suggestions on this process would be helpful. Thank you.

 

[MattKing]

Vuescan is $69.95 USD for a single license.
A 10 user license is $400.00 USD

 

[neeksgeek]

VueScan is a great program and is affordable. I use it with a Nikon Coolscan IV.

But, if you really want to run Nikon Scan on your Mac Mini, you’re probably going to have to run OS X 10.5 Leopard or earlier. The Nikon software only works in a 32-bit OS. After Apple upgraded their OS to 64-bit, Nikon didn’t follow suit. I clung to Leopard for a very long time, it was a nice operating system.

You should find out exactly which Mac Mini you have, that will determine if you can run Leopard or an earlier version of OS X. Here’s a link to a site listing specs for Macs:

https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/index-macmini.html

Look for the “Maximum MacOS” specification.

I happen to have a Mac OS X Tiger (10.4) disc laying around here, which I’m definitely not using. I switched to Linux and Windows 10 several years ago when Apple stopped making computers I could upgrade myself. Now I build my own PCs. Still have an iPhone though!

 

[reddesert]

VueScan is a great program and is affordable. I use it with a Nikon Coolscan IV.

But, if you really want to run Nikon Scan on your Mac Mini, you’re probably going to have to run OS X 10.5 Leopard or earlier. The Nikon software only works in a 32-bit OS. After Apple upgraded their OS to 64-bit, Nikon didn’t follow suit. I clung to Leopard for a very long time, it was a nice operating system.

You should find out exactly which Mac Mini you have, that will determine if you can run Leopard or an earlier version of OS X. Here’s a link to a site listing specs for Macs:

https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/index-macmini.html

Look for the “Maximum MacOS” specification.

Small correction, the OP needs to know the "minimum MacOS" spec, not the maximum. It's not necessarily easy to know what the minimum is. The "pre-installed MacOS" is a safe bet. Sometimes you might be able to install an earlier version than the pre-installed version, but not always.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

There is another option: buy a used 32 bit Windows 7 computer. Places like Newegg often have bargains. Use it exclusively for running the scanner. No connectivity, no internet, no anything. I use an old Dell WIN 7 computer to run a 2000-vintage Minolta Scan Multi medium format scanner because I needed a SCSI connector and 32 bit.

 

[gorbas]

You need OSX 10.6.8, the last OS that can operate with NS4. Even if you have older OS you can still update it to 10.6.8 at Apple website.
My older installation of 10.6.8 got corrupted a few weeks ago and I was able to reinstall and update.
I'm big fan of Nikon Scan 4 and can not stand VueScan.

 

[Horatio]

Vuescan is $69.95 USD for a single license.
A 10 user license is $400.00 USD

Their website is showing $89.95, on sale.

 

[Horatio]

Scratch that. It's 99.95 at the moment.

 

[EdSawyer]

Another option which I use is set up a Windows bootcamp partition - I am running windows 10 on an iMac with the most recent mac os. From there, you can run the windows version of Nikon Scan and drive the scanner with that. It works great, the use of windows is a bit of a hassle but it allows use of modern OS on both the mac and windows side.

 

[warden]

Scratch that. It's 99.95 at the moment.

Don't know what the OP's time is worth but $99 is a bargain compared to the labor he's about to donate to the cause. If using a spare old computer and "sticking it to the man" is part of the fun, well I get that. But in this case "the man" is a very small company indeed, and one that offers free unlimited updates to keep your scanner working with modern computers. Something to consider.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Vuescan is affordable. If you downgrade your OS and if you use the internet, you may make your Mac vulnerable to attacks. If you really want to run your Nikon software, you could try running a virtual machine. I use this one to run Windows on my Mac.
https://www.virtualbox.org/

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You could just buy an older computer to run Nikon Scan if your computer can't run 10.6. Get a laptop like a Powerbook G4 so it is self contained for ease of use.

I like the idea of Windoze on the Mac running Nikon Scan. Then again you would have to buy Windoze....

My 2¢ though is if you are scanning black and white then Vuescan is far better than Nikon Scan. Nikon Scan though is easier for color neg.

 

[gorbas]

My 2¢ though is if you are scanning black and white then Vuescan is far better than Nikon Scan. Nikon Scan though is easier for color neg.

Sorry, my experience with BW negatives is absolutely opposite. Vuescan crates and process files in the way that are totally different than original negatives, I used it with Minolta 5400. Of course, as always, YMMV

 

[neeksgeek]

Small correction, the OP needs to know the "minimum MacOS" spec, not the maximum. It's not necessarily easy to know what the minimum is. The "pre-installed MacOS" is a safe bet. Sometimes you might be able to install an earlier version than the pre-installed version, but not always.

That is what I meant, of course.

 

[MattKing]

Scratch that. It's 99.95 at the moment.

Fascinating - this is what I get when I click on the "Purchase" tab at hamrick.com:

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Sorry, my experience with BW negatives is absolutely opposite. Vuescan crates and process files in the way that are totally different than original negatives, I used it with Minolta 5400. Of course, as always, YMMV

This is about NIKON SCAN. Why you would bother disagreeing with me based on Minolta is beyond me and doesn't help the OP one bit. If you have experience with Nikon Scan, by all means share it here. Otherwise you are just making noise to hear yourself speak.

 

[EdSawyer]

The Mac OS has a built-in method for running a virtual OS, called Bootcamp. You can only use this method, since the virtualized methods of running windows do not support virtualizing the firewire interface that is needed for this scanner. So, you have to run windows via Bootcamp if you want to be able to connect to a modern mac using a USB->Firewire or other interface/adapter.

 

[EdSawyer]

Also, Nikonscan offers better functionality than any of the 3rd party options, particularly for ICE, Kodachrome scanning, multi-pass scanning, and other things that are native to Nikonscan and not incorporated in Silverfast or Vuescan.

 

[warden]

Also, Nikonscan offers better functionality than any of the 3rd party options, particularly for ICE, Kodachrome scanning, multi-pass scanning, and other things that are native to Nikonscan and not incorporated in Silverfast or Vuescan.

What does better functionality mean? I've used both software and the files look the same to me. (I've never scanned Kodachrome btw)

 

[Les Sarile]

I just bought another Windows Vista desktop for $75 that has built-in firewire and runs Nikonscan just fine with my Coolscan 9000. It's only used for scsanning and storage.

What does better functionality mean? I've used both software and the files look the same to me. (I've never scanned Kodachrome btw)

In my early scanning efforts - early 2000, I tried Vuescan with my Coolscan 5000 and here are some direct comparisons.

Using the built-in Kodak 160VC film profile in Vuescan and modifiers compared to a straight-up all color modifiers off on Nikonscan - using the same Coolscan 5000.

Full res -> http://www.fototime.com/CFB9B61FC2EBFE1/orig.jpg

Nikonscan ICE is a licensed product not incorporated in Vuescan and this shows the difference. Same film scanned on the same Coolscan 5000 using the different software.

Full res version -> http://www.fototime.com/B52423F2F398DA3/orig.jpg

BTW, Nikonscan and 9000 is much better even compared to the Nikonscan Coolscan 5000 combination . . .

Full res version -> http://www.fototime.com/36BED059AD8E686/orig.jpg

Nikonscan + 9000 ICE on Kodachrome is perfect too . . .

Full res version -> http://www.fototime.com/E3B7FD459E9EA9F/orig.jpg

Like I said, this was a very early version of Vuescan and things may have changed for the better these days. However, tens of thousands of various frames of films scanned to date using Nikonscan + Coolscan V, 5000 and 9000 and I can only describe the whole experience as uneventful.

 

[EdSawyer]

Les said it better than I can, for sure!

 

[warden]

Using the built-in Kodak 160VC film profile in Vuescan and modifiers compared to a straight-up all color modifiers off on Nikonscan - using the same Coolscan 5000.

Hi Les, thanks for the example images, which are helpful. As far as color goes I'm not sure what your Vuescan image above is suggesting, other than the rather obvious reality that your scans will look horrific if you're too stubborn to RTFM and learn how to use the software. There is nothing inherent in Vuescan that guarantees awful results like you're sharing, but I'm sure you know that. There are examples everywhere of pleasing color achieved with Vuescan, Silverfast, etc, but selecting a "night" preset isn't the way to get there and never was the way to get there.

But Nikonscan's ICE is very cool I agree, and if you have negatives that need it I can see why you'd want software that offers that functionality. In my case I use photoshop to remove any blemishes and I'm satisfied with that.

And Kodachrome, well if you need it you need it, and have to use the software that offers that functionality even if it means keeping an old computer running. I get it. If I had a pile of Kodachromes to digitize I'm not sure what I'd do actually, but it's nice to know you can keep the legacy software running on legacy computers if you have to.

 

[Les Sarile]

Hi Les, thanks for the example images, which are helpful. As far as color goes I'm not sure what your Vuescan image above is suggesting, other than the rather obvious reality that your scans will look horrific if you're too stubborn to RTFM and learn how to use the software. There is nothing inherent in Vuescan that guarantees awful results like you're sharing, but I'm sure you know that. There are examples everywhere of pleasing color achieved with Vuescan, Silverfast, etc, but selecting a "night" preset isn't the way to get there and never was the way to get there.

I never suggested Vuescan results using built-in film profile and the various modifiers were horrific. They're just the results. For some it may be good and for others it may not but I only judge mine for myself. I've done enough work and know that others will have a different opinion of color contrast on-screen and on paper. You may also presume INRTFM.

BTW, Coolscan 5000 + Nikonscan tales 30 seconds per frame, 50 seconds with ICE. As good as I am with post work, I cannot match the time or quality of that automatic dust and scratch removal.

 

[warden]

BTW, Coolscan 5000 + Nikonscan tales 30 seconds per frame, 50 seconds with ICE. As good as I am with post work, I cannot match the time or quality of that automatic dust and scratch removal.

Yep, especially if you have negatives that have been severely damaged ICE is pretty amazing and a timesaver. Not the case for me but for many I'm sure.

 

[Les Sarile]

Yep, especially if you have negatives that have been severely damaged ICE is pretty amazing and a timesaver. Not the case for me but for many I'm sure.

Convinced another to purchase the 9000 for his thousands of Kodachrome frames to scan but he "enjoyed" cleaning them in post anyway . . .