VueScan vs. NikonScan

What is everyone's opinion of VueScan? Can you suggest any resources to help me use this software to better advantage?

I'm a Mac guy using a Nikon 8000 scanner; I have been pretty happy with Nikon Scan (now at 4.0.2 I think it is), but this software faces an uncertain future on IntelMac machines, one of which I hope will replace my sloooow G4 PowerMac next year.

I've had VueScan for some time but barely used it; I find its user interface nearly impossible and documentation is so rudimentary it's a joke. I've never been able to get decent batch scans (strips of 645 negatives, 4 to a strip) using VueScan.

I'm trying to prepare myself for life after NikonScan, if that's to be. I know SilverFast is out there, but its price is prohibitive.

Any suggestions or opinions are welcomed.

I have been using VueScan for a while with a 6 year old flatbed scanner in Mac OS X Tiger, and have just started to use it with my new Nikon Coolscan 9000 scanner, no complaints so far after 30 medium format scans. I am however slightly unsure about VueScan's colour negative scanning options compared to my experience of using a Nikon Coolscan 4000 under Silverfast AI.

Hope this helps,

Tom.

Hi
I use Vuesacan with my Coolscan 9000 and scan colour transparencies and B&W negatives.
I agree Vuescan does take some getting used to, particularly the settings for MF strip scanning, but the results are well worth it, particularly with B&W negatives. IMHO, pound for pound this is one of the best, if not the best scanning applications around.
Ken

Ken,

I was surprised (and very pleased with) the quality of B&W negative scans from Delta 100 using the Nikon 9000 / VueScan combination.

Tom.

Tom
I have not used Delta 100, but Pan F FP4+ HP5+ and Delta 1600 (35mm and 120) do work well for me, as does ADOX 50 (120). However, I may need to slightly boost the contrast of this film during development.
I am also waiting for an opportunity to try out ADOX CMS 20 (35mm).
Kind regards
Ken

thanks...

Appreciate the input.

Agree, setting the software up to get decent strip scans, with the frames aligned with the scanned areas, seems nearly impossible. Any suggestions on how to accomplish this? Instructions are rudimentary if not actually nonexistent.

This is my main problem with VueScan, aside from its lousy documentation and unfriendly user interface.

Ok, not to be a snot, stick in the mud, party pooper, whatever, here, but ...

... to make a long story long ...

Back when I first got the negative scanner I was climbing the learning curve and learning things by trial, error, and experience. I would occasionally post a scanning question on another board. More often than not, the universal one-size-fits-all answer for almost any scanning issue would be a chorus of "get Vuescan". I swear that if I posted that my car would not start or my plumbing was stopped, they would say to get Vuescan.

Vuescan does have a lot of very loyal fans. It must be doing something for somebody, actually, for many.

Well, I did download the demo, set it up, and quite honestly I found it more complicated and more confusing than the stock K-M scanning software.

What I did find out, however, was that my issues were all solved by simply RTFM-ing and playing around a bit with technique, adjustment, and attention to detail when scanning.

So I asked the Vuescan fans if Vuescan would really and truly help out in the following areas:

1. Would Vuescan extract any more information from my negative or slide than the stock software would, when properly operated?

2. Would Vuescan scan negatives or slides faster at the same resolution and such than the stock software?

3. Does Vuescan have any dust/scratch/whatever removal feature that really, truly, actually works. (The stock software has the "auto dust brush" which is about as effective as a placebo on a staph infection!)

I think there was another question, but I forget.

Anyway, the bottom line was no on all questions.

I can see one advantage to Vuescan. It would allow me to use both the negative scanner and the HP flatbed with a single interface. However, since I use them for different purposes in different workflows, I don't see any major benefit, plus one disadvantage of having one more thing to buy, one more thing to learn, and one more thing to upgrade and maintain.

Bottom line, for me, anyway, the stock K-M (and HP) software works fine.

My guess is that Vuescan was written in response to some scanning software that was really ugly and ill-behaved.

My suggestion is that if the stock software works for you, use it. If it does not, try Vuescan, but don't expect it to extract detail where there is none, remove dust, clean out the cat box, etc.

That's my take on it, although I think it's not the most popular.

dmr said:

that my issues were all solved by simply RTFM-ing

Click to expand...

I'd be more than happy to RTFM if only one existed that was intelligible.

My main concern was not that I have any issues with NikonScan (which comes with the scanner), but that I'm concerned whether NikonScan will be supported on the IntelMac to which I hope to upgrade in 2007.

Can anyone direct me to a resource that actually explains how to get decent scans of multi-image strips of 120 film in which the frames match up with the negatives properly?

Mike,

I have a screenshot that might help on the computer I do the scanning on. I'll try to remember to look into it later this morning (GMT).

Tom.

dmr said:

My guess is that Vuescan was written in response to some scanning software that was really ugly and ill-behaved.

Click to expand...

VueScan was not the first software that Ed Hamrick introduced. It began with VuePrint, which I have used for the past 10 years. VuePrint was a simple and full featured viewer that offered many things that the other apps of the time did not. VueScan came later in the late 1990s as a response to the junky, clunky, proprietary TWAIN/TWUNK interfaces of the time. Generally these offered little customization and even fewer features. VueScan quickly developed a loyal folloing as low priced shareware available as an internet download.

It is possible that with the newer interfaces and other graphic manipulation software (such as Photoshop) that VueScan has become an interesting and well used anachronism. Some scanning systems still require their custom platform as an intermediary between the device and end graphic software. In this VueScan still has a place. I do have to chuckle over the "learning curve" lament. Like PhotoShop is intuitive???

For what it is worth, I have read a post by Vincent Oliver on his website stating he is working on updating the user's manual for VueScan. Vincent is the one who writes all the reviews on www.photo-i.co.uk. He is a good writer and digital photographer, so hopefully better documentation is on the horizon.

Doug
---
www.BetterScanning.com