I just upgraded computers and in the process upgraded to the Coolscan IV ED
from an old SCSI Coolscan III and am very, very frustrated by the piss poor
quality of the images that the Coolscan produces using the Coolscan 3.1.2
bundled software -- very dark, poor color. I have redone previously scanned
images to compare with the Coolscan III and the old software, and there is
simply no comparison in the output. I am well aware that I can adjust the
analog gain to improve the brightness, but I am doing lots of batch scans in
the process of putting a negative library into digital form and cannot spend
the time resetting each image. (At least the Coolscan 3.1.2 software is
better than the old one for batch scans.).

I wondered briefly if I had purchased a bum scanner, but tried Vuescan,
which produced beautiful images the first time around. Unfortnately, as far
as I can tell, one cannot do batch saves. (I have only looked at the test
version -- one can batch scan a negative strip, but each image has to be
saved separately and the file name has to be manually adjusted. -- could be
wrong there).

I am curious if anyone out there has had similar problems with the Coolscan
IV ED first of all and if anyone has any suggestions for work arounds. I
tried using the old Nikon software, but it won't recognize the new USB
scanner.

Thanks.

Each image gets saved on its own with a numbered file name. There is nothing
for you to do except replace the negative strip after they are done. At least
that's how it works with my Canon FS4000.


for7b@aol.com

"NoNameNoAgeNoNothing" <Perowe@gol.com> wrote in message
news:bkj168$ieh$1@nnrp.gol.com...
| I just upgraded computers and in the process upgraded to the Coolscan IV
ED
| from an old SCSI Coolscan III and am very, very frustrated by the piss
poor
| quality of the images that the Coolscan produces using the Coolscan 3.1.2
| bundled software -- very dark, poor color. I have redone previously
scanned
| images to compare with the Coolscan III and the old software, and there is
| simply no comparison in the output. I am well aware that I can adjust the
| analog gain to improve the brightness, but I am doing lots of batch scans
in
| the process of putting a negative library into digital form and cannot
spend
| the time resetting each image. (At least the Coolscan 3.1.2 software is
| better than the old one for batch scans.).
|
| I wondered briefly if I had purchased a bum scanner, but tried Vuescan,
| which produced beautiful images the first time around. Unfortnately, as
far
| as I can tell, one cannot do batch saves. (I have only looked at the test
| version -- one can batch scan a negative strip, but each image has to be
| saved separately and the file name has to be manually adjusted. -- could
be
| wrong there).
|
| I am curious if anyone out there has had similar problems with the
Coolscan
| IV ED first of all and if anyone has any suggestions for work arounds. I
| tried using the old Nikon software, but it won't recognize the new USB
| scanner.
|
| Thanks.
|
|

I have the CoolScan IV and also use NikonScan 3.1.2. The combo works fine
for me, but I had to do some fiddling around with options before scans came
out well. I get the best output if I do one of the following:
(A) disable "Nikon Color Management" under "Preferences" (This will
deactivate some of the editing controls.)
(B) leave "Nikon Color Management" checked (ie, leave it on) but specify
that RGB is to be "Scanner RGB" (This leaves all the editing controls
useable.)

Jean

I have tried with and without Nikon Color Management already and found image
quality poor regardless. I'll fiddle around with solution B below and see
how that pans out.

In the meantime, I have discovered that I was mistaken about Vuescan's
ability to do batch scanning. It was more powerful there than I had
thought. After runner a dozen or so more tests with Vuescan, I remain very
impressed with the scans it produces - great color.

Thanks for your tip.

"Jean" <Jean@spam.not> wrote in message
news:E%kbb.1459$wS2.38143@eagle.america.net...

I believe you're already leaning that way, but VueScan is the way to go for
large amounts of batch scanning.

I vaguely remember having those kinds of problems with NikonScan when I
first got my scanner, but I only used it for a few hours before I gave up
and went back with VueScan entirely.