RE: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
This is a very unpopular point of view, but my thoughts exactly. I try, I upgrade, I mess around for a while finding out what has changed, I lose a scan or two due to overwriting or wrong settings, I do a "perfect" scan and find it is no better than I get from Nikonscan with much less effort and time. I go back to Nikonscan... Like you I reserve it for an alternative approach in rare cases and sometimes on these occasions it is excellent. I do like Ed's version of ROC that is useful since I don't have it otherwise. Julian At 16:03 22/11/01, Jawed wrote: >So, nowadays I reserve Vuescan for occasional use to give me an alternative >point of view on a "difficult" image. This happens once in, erm, a few >hundred images. I have a shot of the moon which it rescued - terrible >picture but of academic interest. > >I'm disappointed with Vuescan. Sometimes I give my opinion a reality check >(e.g. with an upgrade of Vuescan) but I just can't get results I like. > >I think Vuescan is for the forensic photographers. I like that concept.
RE: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
{Bear in mind: I only scan negatives - I've never shot a slide film in my
life)
I concur with Bob. I'm licensed for Vuescan, too. Originally I purchased
it because there was strong support for the idea that "once mastered, its
results are superior".
I can't master it. I can't batch scan. I can't get consistent crops. When
Vuescan doesn't know the film I'm scanning, it's a disaster.
Also, I had an epiphany, some time ago. "Flat scans" of the type that
Vuescan excels at producing are all very well in a technical sense, but I
find that Levels/Curves cannot fix the vast majority of the "flat" images
that Vuescan produces so that they have a comparable "vitality" to that
shown by images produced by Nikon Scan.
By vitality I don't merely mean contrast/black-point/white-point. I also
mean the nature of the tonality of the image. Something related to the
question of "gamma" and also the inherent S-shaped response that all films
have (so far as I know). So, all the effort I put into obtaining the full
tonal range in a negative (in the form of a flat scan) is wasted because I
get distinctly more pleasing images from Nikon Scan.
I honestly wish I hadn't chased the tail of "flat scans" for so long. They
are not all they're cracked up to be. I realised that Nikon Scan was
choosing, if it had to "clip", the clip I would have chosen to do. The vast
majority of my images scanned from negatives don't, in fact, need to be
clipped.
So, nowadays I reserve Vuescan for occasional use to give me an alternative
point of view on a "difficult" image. This happens once in, erm, a few
hundred images. I have a shot of the moon which it rescued - terrible
picture but of academic interest.
I'm disappointed with Vuescan. Sometimes I give my opinion a reality check
(e.g. with an upgrade of Vuescan) but I just can't get results I like.
I think Vuescan is for the forensic photographers. I like that concept.
Jawed
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Kehl -
> Kvernstoen, Kehl & Assoc.
> Sent: 06 October 2001 15:46
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
>
>
> NikonScan's GUI is amazingly simple, especially for full roll
> scanning. It
> gives a full roll prescan of thumbnails which allows you to select and
> rotate frames you want to scan. It's much less hassle than
> manually typing
> in Vuescan frame numbers, frame offset, orientations, etcall of which
> need to be done while viewing your full roll of film on a
> lightbox!?!. Not
> all that practical.
>
> I'm a registered user of Vuescan, but I use NikonScan 3.1. Even
> if I deduct
> the crash and recovery time of NikonScan 3.1, it is faster and more hassle
> free to use than Vuescan.
> (sorry, Ed)
>
> Bob Kehl
RE: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
Cary, NS 3.1 is not even remotely crash happy on my PC (Windows 98 normal version) so your assertion that single CPU is as bad as SMP is wrong. It runs for days without crashing (8 hour scanning sessions in which NS is open continuously). I am happy to acknowledge, though, that I was unfair to you, before, with respect to NS 3.x and dual-processor W2K crashes. I had suggested a while back that you had a duff install of "something". Evidence from peeps on this list clearly shows I was wrong in that respect. But 3.1 for us "normal" peeps (single processor crowd!) is really solid. Jawed > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Enoch's Vision, > Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) > Sent: 05 October 2001 22:47 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors [cut] > > In Win2K it's simple to set an application to use just one processor by > using Task Manager. Right-click on the application name in the > process list > and select Processor Affinity. However, I've done this with NS 3.1 and it > makes no difference whatsoever. All that the message from Nikon > tells me is > that they're clueless or that they vaguely suspect that their > application's > multithreading is less than optimal. They really need to hire > professional > development people instead of those high school interns they're using. > Perhaps they should make an offer to Ed Hamrick that he can't refuse;-) > > Everyone knows that NS crashes just as readily on a single CPU as it does > on an SMP system. > > > Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia > http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.com/ -- "Behind all > these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through > all things. > The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the > created object." > ~Joseph Campbell > >
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
Why not Vuescan? I use it with my LS-4000 and Rollfilm adapter and it works flawlessly. Combine that with Ed's incredible support and you have the perfect combination. Tom > Thanks Joe, I was just about to upgrade again. I'm running dual xeon 450's > with Win2k and NikonScan 3.1. It crashes and closes NikonScan 3.1 routinely > during full roll prescans and batch scans, forcing me to reopen and continue > scanning where it left off. I usually get about 15-20 frames scanned and > saved to disk before it crashes. A bit of a nuisance, but it's the best > solution I've found for batch scanning. > > Bob Kehl >
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
Cary writes: > [Nikon] really need to hire professional > development people instead of those high > school interns they're using. I've had exactly the same thoughts concerning them in the past. Their NikonScan has always looked like something designed by a high-school student: a fancy appearance that fails to adhere to the conventions of the operating environment, poor organization, inadequate testing, and serious instabilities. All of these are tell-tale signs of inexperienced and/or incompetent developers. It gets the job done, but I ask it to do only the minimum necessary, and I do the rest in Photoshop.
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
Thanks Joe, I was just about to upgrade again. I'm running dual xeon 450's with Win2k and NikonScan 3.1. It crashes and closes NikonScan 3.1 routinely during full roll prescans and batch scans, forcing me to reopen and continue scanning where it left off. I usually get about 15-20 frames scanned and saved to disk before it crashes. A bit of a nuisance, but it's the best solution I've found for batch scanning. Bob Kehl - Original Message - From: Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 4:46 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors > At 20:18 05-10-01 -0700, you wrote: > >Just got this back from Nikon: > > > > >"It is known by Nikon that there are problems with Dual Processor PC's, > >both > >Windows and Mac. Although the Product Brochures do not specifically say > >the 2CPU machines will not work, neither do they say it does. > > > That's a bunch of weasel-worded crap. No application states anything like that. > > > > Dual > >Processors are good but only for applications that are designed for them > >like Photoshop. Ours is not and probably will not be for the foreseeable > >future. Best performance with our products is achieved (currently) on > >single processor P4 machines running lots of RDRAM"< > > > Excuse me? Nikon is implying that NS won't work properly on AMD systems or > P2's. Because only high-end P3 and to-date all P4 machines have RDRAM. > Perhaps Nikon development doesn't even know what that means. > > > >so the forums guesses were right, dual processors and nikonscan dont work > >very well. (I get one scan in four or so) > > > >funny thing is I'm not asking for NS to *utilise* dual processors, just not > >to crash with them. > > > In Win2K it's simple to set an application to use just one processor by > using Task Manager. Right-click on the application name in the process list > and select Processor Affinity. However, I've done this with NS 3.1 and it > makes no difference whatsoever. All that the message from Nikon tells me is > that they're clueless or that they vaguely suspect that their application's > multithreading is less than optimal. They really need to hire professional > development people instead of those high school interns they're using. > Perhaps they should make an offer to Ed Hamrick that he can't refuse;-) > > Everyone knows that NS crashes just as readily on a single CPU as it does > on an SMP system. > > > Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia > http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.com/ -- "Behind all > these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. > The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object." > ~Joseph Campbell >
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
I use NikonScan regularly with a dual-processor system under Windows NT, and I've never had any problem with it at all. I'm only using version 2.5, however (the last version that will still run under Windows NT). Since later versions will not run under NT, it sounds like they really rewrote something, which is usually a bad sign. - Original Message - From: "PAUL GRAHAM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 05:18 Subject: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors > Just got this back from Nikon: > > >"It is known by Nikon that there are problems with Dual Processor PC's, > both > Windows and Mac. Although the Product Brochures do not specifically say > the 2CPU machines will not work, neither do they say it does. Dual > Processors are good but only for applications that are designed for them > like Photoshop. Ours is not and probably will not be for the foreseeable > future. Best performance with our products is achieved (currently) on > single processor P4 machines running lots of RDRAM"< > > so the forums guesses were right, dual processors and nikonscan dont work > very well. (I get one scan in four or so) > > funny thing is I'm not asking for NS to *utilise* dual processors, just not > to crash with them. > > an awful lot of people, Mac or PC, working with such large files and > semi-pro machines will have dual machines for Photoshop... it sure speeds > my work up. > > Vuescan sure looks good now? > > Paul > >
Re: filmscanners: Nikonscan and dual processors
At 20:18 05-10-01 -0700, you wrote: >Just got this back from Nikon: > > >"It is known by Nikon that there are problems with Dual Processor PC's, >both >Windows and Mac. Although the Product Brochures do not specifically say >the 2CPU machines will not work, neither do they say it does. That's a bunch of weasel-worded crap. No application states anything like that. > Dual >Processors are good but only for applications that are designed for them >like Photoshop. Ours is not and probably will not be for the foreseeable >future. Best performance with our products is achieved (currently) on >single processor P4 machines running lots of RDRAM"< Excuse me? Nikon is implying that NS won't work properly on AMD systems or P2's. Because only high-end P3 and to-date all P4 machines have RDRAM. Perhaps Nikon development doesn't even know what that means. >so the forums guesses were right, dual processors and nikonscan dont work >very well. (I get one scan in four or so) > >funny thing is I'm not asking for NS to *utilise* dual processors, just not >to crash with them. In Win2K it's simple to set an application to use just one processor by using Task Manager. Right-click on the application name in the process list and select Processor Affinity. However, I've done this with NS 3.1 and it makes no difference whatsoever. All that the message from Nikon tells me is that they're clueless or that they vaguely suspect that their application's multithreading is less than optimal. They really need to hire professional development people instead of those high school interns they're using. Perhaps they should make an offer to Ed Hamrick that he can't refuse;-) Everyone knows that NS crashes just as readily on a single CPU as it does on an SMP system. Cary Enoch Reinstein aka Enoch's Vision, Inc., Peach County, Georgia http://www.enochsvision.com/, http://www.bahaivision.com/ -- "Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object." ~Joseph Campbell
