[filmscanners] Re: Nikon scanners on Mac
Hi Bill, Thanks for responding to my enquiry. However, I am afraid it is the sordid details that I am lacking. I have not been scanning Kodachrome, although at some point I will want to do that, as I have many, if you include the Agfachrome, which may fall into the same class (?). For my negative scanning, I am still lost. I have not been able to find any combination that will print even close to the correct color. There are many permutations of embedded profile x color space x working space and other settings. Even though there seems to be a disconnect between Nikon and Colorsync, it seems that the problem must be with the printer profile, because the image looks right on screen (best with Nikon CMM OFF) until I do the print/preview. Then the magenta always blows up. And the print looks just like the preview: crap. But I have selected the Epson 2200 profile for the specific paper. The Epson 2200 profile for Enhanced Matte is recognized by Colorsync. Why is this so hard? I don't want a degree in computer science or desktop publishing...I just want to print my goddamn photos. Berry On 12/10/04 8:20 AM, Bill Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: HI Berry-- I bought a Nikon SC4000ED filmscanner a couple of years ago and have used it with Macs running MacOS 9 and MacOS X. In neither case did I have any real trouble getting it to attach a ColorSync profile to scans and have the scans look right in Photoshop or in print. Although I did find through experimentation that I got the best results from my Kodachromes by scanning with Nikon Color Management off, then later in Photoshop assigning to the scan a custom profile I made from a similarly scanned IT8 target. I't been many months since I've been able to do any scanning, so I don't remember exactly how to set things up, but I thought I'd at least assure you that it can be done. --Bill At 7:00 PM -0700 12/9/04, Berry Ives wrote: Hi folks, My problem persists. I am wondering if others who use Nikon scanners on Mac (assuming there are some) are using Colorsync. If so, what settings are you using in Nikon Scan etc for color management? Thanks, Berry -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * bill_sub-AT-billfernandez-DOT-com * http://billfernandez.com == -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Nikon scanners on Mac
HI Berry-- I bought a Nikon SC4000ED filmscanner a couple of years ago and have used it with Macs running MacOS 9 and MacOS X. In neither case did I have any real trouble getting it to attach a ColorSync profile to scans and have the scans look right in Photoshop or in print. Although I did find through experimentation that I got the best results from my Kodachromes by scanning with Nikon Color Management off, then later in Photoshop assigning to the scan a custom profile I made from a similarly scanned IT8 target. I't been many months since I've been able to do any scanning, so I don't remember exactly how to set things up, but I thought I'd at least assure you that it can be done. --Bill At 7:00 PM -0700 12/9/04, Berry Ives wrote: Hi folks, My problem persists. I am wondering if others who use Nikon scanners on Mac (assuming there are some) are using Colorsync. If so, what settings are you using in Nikon Scan etc for color management? Thanks, Berry -- == Bill Fernandez * User Interface Architect * Bill Fernandez Design (505) 346-3080 * bill_sub-AT-billfernandez-DOT-com * http://billfernandez.com == Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Nikon scanners on Mac
Hi folks, My problem persists. I am wondering if others who use Nikon scanners on Mac (assuming there are some) are using Colorsync. hm. I let Nikon use its own colour management and generate an AdobeRGB-profiled/embedded file and take it from there with other apps. Seems to work fine. Initially I was all gung-ho about using an all-colorsync process, but at that time I couldn't find a colorsync profile for the Nikon scanner after going through all of the profiles installed (poorly labelled at best). Dieder Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Nikon Scanners
Frank Mullins wrote: ..., my slide collection consists of over 10,000 slides. While I am sure I will choose not to digitize all of them, a bulk loader is a major consideration. Thanks, for bringing this to my attention. To scan these one at a time would take hundreds, if not thousands, of hours. I assume the bulk loaders readily handle standard slide mounts. Probably 90% of my slides are in the older standard Kodak cardboard mounts. The more recent ones are the Kodak plastic mounts so I hope they would not present a problem. I have read several reports from people who have used older models of Nikon slide feeders. As I recall, they found the feeders were very reliable with plastic slide mounts. With card mounts there was a risk that the feeder would try to gobble two slides at the same time, causing a jam. This was easily averted by reducing the size of an input slot (with, for example, a piece of credit card held on with adhesive tape). Does this apply to the current model, does anyone know? Peter Marquis-Kyle www.marquis-kyle.com.au Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Nikon Scanners
At 3:55 PM +1000 9/14/04, Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote: I have read several reports from people who have used older models of Nikon slide feeders. As I recall, they found the feeders were very reliable with plastic slide mounts. With card mounts there was a risk that the feeder would try to gobble two slides at the same time, causing a jam. This was easily averted by reducing the size of an input slot (with, for example, a piece of credit card held on with adhesive tape). Does this apply to the current model, does anyone know? Peter Marquis-Kyle www.marquis-kyle.com.au My understanding is that it still applies. (Actually, the current model has been around for a while--it also fits the 4000.) I haven't tested mine yet, but I fully expect having to modify it when I do. Carlisle Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Nikon Scanners
Art and Carlisle, Thank you both for your response to my question concerning the Coolscan V vs the Super Coolscan 5000. Carlisle, my slide collection consists of over 10,000 slides. While I am sure I will choose not to digitize all of them, a bulk loader is a major consideration. Thanks, for bringing this to my attention. To scan these one at a time would take hundreds, if not thousands, of hours. I assume the bulk loaders readily handle standard slide mounts. Probably 90% of my slides are in the older standard Kodak cardboard mounts. The more recent ones are the Kodak plastic mounts so I hope they would not present a problem. Art, concerning the 14 bit A/D vs the 16 bit A/D--I will have to assume that the CCD sensors in both Nikon scanners are of equal quality, so other things being equal, I guess the 16 bit A/D should be expected to give slightly improved scans. Also, the slides I will be scanning fall into a wide range of densities so that is a major variable. I really have no way to test both scanners prior to purchase. I can't even find a store locally that actually stocks either one. They are special order items only. Once again, thank you both for your input. Frank Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
