Canon FS4000US advice sought

[john]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

1. Does it make any difference altering histogram etc before scanning? Does
this affect the way the scanner scans a negative/slide or are all the
'changes' done afterwards i.e. the slide can be scanned at normal settings
and edited afterwards.

2. Using FARE (dust and scratch remover) sometimes generates strange
patterns on very dark sections of a slide - why? Is this a fault? Scratches
are removed but the pattern is unacceptable.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

There are differences of opinion about whether to make those manipulations
prior to scanning or afterward. I prefer to make minimal or no adjustments
prior to scanning but you have to see what you prefer. Lasersoft has a $250
program that allows more manipulation than the Canon software. You can try
the demo: I did not think it worthwhile.

Vuescan also works with the FS 4000, and while I purchased it (actually to
use with a different scanner) I find it rarely gives better results than the
Canon software and often worse, for reasons I cannot understand.

If you select "color matching" as an option then no such manipulation is
allowed. For reasonably well exposed negatives and positives this is often a
good choice if you use color management systematically in the scanner,
Photoshop and with your printer driver.

For poorly exposed images, particularly underexposed negatives, I have found
that the best way to coax a usable image is to make adjustments in the
scanning software.

There are different settings for the FARE program but I would only use the
lowest. I have not seen the artifacts you describe. FARE does not work with
Kodachrome.

This is a very slow scanner, although capable of very high quality work, but
it will save you time in the long run to experiment and find what works best
for you.

 

[john]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.scanner (More info?)

Thanks

I use scsi which is a lot faster (but still not brilliant)

Artifacts appear on Agfachrome slides, but not all.

"bmoag" <aetoo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:RPBmc.45716$Wm3.22088@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com...
> There are differences of opinion about whether to make those manipulations
> prior to scanning or afterward. I prefer to make minimal or no adjustments
> prior to scanning but you have to see what you prefer. Lasersoft has a
$250
> program that allows more manipulation than the Canon software. You can try
> the demo: I did not think it worthwhile.
>
> Vuescan also works with the FS 4000, and while I purchased it (actually to
> use with a different scanner) I find it rarely gives better results than
the
> Canon software and often worse, for reasons I cannot understand.
>
> If you select "color matching" as an option then no such manipulation is
> allowed. For reasonably well exposed negatives and positives this is often
a
> good choice if you use color management systematically in the scanner,
> Photoshop and with your printer driver.
>
> For poorly exposed images, particularly underexposed negatives, I have
found
> that the best way to coax a usable image is to make adjustments in the
> scanning software.
>
> There are different settings for the FARE program but I would only use the
> lowest. I have not seen the artifacts you describe. FARE does not work
with
> Kodachrome.
>
> This is a very slow scanner, although capable of very high quality work,
but
> it will save you time in the long run to experiment and find what works
best
> for you.
>
>