Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Message

[Digital BW] Re: Either of these film scanner have advantage for BW film?

2005-05-25 by fisherrcan

If you want to consider a KM5400 model, look at the first version
rather than the II.  If it's a choice between the 5400 II and the
Coolscan V, go for the Nikon.  

Both the first edition 5400 and the new Nikon use cold cathode
fluorescent light sources.  The 5400 II uses an LED light source.  LED
is a much poorer option and doesn't work well for b&w at all.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Hargens"
<chargens@s...> wrote:
> Using Vuescan in raw mode, you can "rescan" your raw file as many
> times as you like -- i.e., no need to reinsert film in the scanner --
> and tweak the file using the Vuescan software. Or, if you prefer, you
> can do all of your editing in PS. With raw files all the possibilities
> are left open. The disadvantage is that you initially have larger
> files to edit since the crop is at maximum size and your files are RGB
> instead of grayscale. 
> 
> Chris Hargens
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Djon"
> <westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
> > Mark...uh...I think what you're trying to say is that RAW scanning
> > lets you confine all your processing to Photoshop, where you're
> > happiest working. Keep it simple, etc. Is that it? Or do you think RAW
> > inherently leads to better results than TIFF? 
> > 
> > Perhaps RAW isn't as useful in scanning as in digital photography? 
> > 
> > I've not seriously played with digital camera output (just a p&s) but
> > what I've read suggests camera RAW has little advantage over TIFF...
> > primarily just as a way to bypass the camera's own internal noise
> > reduction (Vs TIFF or JPEG)...but I don't think scanners have internal
> > noise reduction systems, though they are available in scanner
> > applications.
> > 
> > Scanners do (I think) have capabilities that Photoshop doesn't. Multi
> > pass is one, though I've never seen a convincing case for bothering. I
> >  also think (don't know) extreme film profiles would be harder to
> > impliment after scanning.  
> > 
> > Guess I'll have to scan RAW Vs TIFF and see for myself. 
> > 
> > Djon

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.