Tim
thanks for the pat on the back
well, yes there is some sharpening. Typically its not much as I feel that well focused shake free film has a lot going with it to start with.
My technique varies a little between the Epson and the Nikon
With the Epson I first do some sharpening at about 1.7 pixels radius to get around the fact that the Epson is not "sharp" out of the box. I'll vary this figure between 0.9 up to 2.1 and strength of between 70% and 100% depending on how it looks to me, so its subjective. I then apply a little of what I call local area contrast enhancement which is unsharp mask to around 60 pixels and between 10 and 20%. I do this before applying curves.
With the Nikon I usually don't do much of the first sharpening ... as it seems to just build grain.
I've never ever been really satisfied with slide. I understand the colour management advantages for the advertising set, but for me scene representation is always a little subjective too ... so what Negative may loose out in that area it gains so much in usability for me.
From the first velvia I scanned on a LS-1000 (way back in 1996 or something) till now on my LS-4000 I just don't like it. For decades people around me seem to chant the mantra of Ohm ... slide slide slide ... Ohm
but I have never ever got as good a result on any side by side I've done. And interestingly the results always look the same (over the years and varied equipment).
For example on
this page I publish the results of a test between Provia and Pro160S in 4x5 sheets (scanned with an Epson 4870) ... interestingly I see almost exactly the same sorts of issues in the details when I repeated it here years later with Sensia and Superia using an LS-4000
with the results spread across a few blog posts
here and
here.
I intend to do a better blog page comparing the images of the day and then to incorporate mrred's findings with his scanner (a Pacific Film type) when I get about to posting him that
hmm ... did I answer your questions?