Epson V800 - Epson Scan Vs Silverfast

[RHITMrB]

The scanner has electronic control over focus. Vuescan allows you to overside (adjust) this. I'm not sure why Epson Scan does not. I have no regard for Silverfast so I am not surprised.

Not true. There's just the two settings (normal and "full area" for scanning 8x10 or whatever larger-than-4x5 film directly on the glass). This is accomplished using one of two lenses. Silverfast does have this setting available, but it's not helpful here.

Wow - all that sophisticated hardware an we still need to resort to posit notes as shims? I don't get it.

I don't think this is necessary and the DOF on the V700/750/800/850 is enough that the three adjustment positions will be enough unless something is seriously wrong.

The ICE setting still seems to function with Epson Scan. It's the iSRD which falls over with SilverFast. See my other posts of example scans. They don't show the blobs that I'm talking about but is this effect as a result of trying to use with with B&W? If so, why doesn't silverfast just prevent the use of iSRD when you've selected B&W?

What I said is still true, then, just flip which program is doing what! :P If I were scanning C41 film as B&W, I could still use ICE - in any case I'd rather my scanning software be less restrictive than more.

[alen]

It does. You will see it with Vuescan pro in pro mode.

I think this is worth a thread on its own and im sure many here would love to know more.

[RHITMrB]

I think this is worth a thread on its own and im sure many here would love to know more.

Again, he's referring to the dual lens system, which is mentioned explicitly in plenty of places in the manual and marketing literature. One lens is focused directly on the upper surface of the platen and the other is some distance (1.5mm or so?) above the glass, for use with the film holders.

edit to illustrate:

[Kirk Gittings]

Correct and it does not have any electronic focus control. Each lens has a fixed focus point.

[neil poulsen]

. . . Finally, I avoid letting the scanning software make adjustments for me simply because it's so inconsistent. I always scan my negatives in Silverfast as 48-bit (color) or 16-bit (greyscale) positives with zeroed out adjustments and do everything else in Photoshop and Lightroom.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I've spoken with some. That's my approach for b&W, to "zero" out adjustments; better to make the same adjustments in Photoshop, which is more capable. (Still open to contrary arguments, though.)

However, if one's using a more sophisticated scanner, like a drum scanner (e.g. Tango?), where one can adjust the gain of the light source, etc., that's a different ballgame. That's not possible with any of the prosumer scanners of which I'm aware.

I do like Siverfast for reducing the effect of the mask when scanning color negative film. These are not different ICC profiles that are applied, which clip the image to the saturation of whatever target has been used to create the profile.. Silverfast has worked with different film manufacturers to arrive at "settings" that they internally apply for each type of film.

[RHITMrB]

I'm not an expert by any means, but I've spoken with some. That's my approach for b&W, to "zero" out adjustments; better to make the same adjustments in Photoshop, which is more capable. (Still open to contrary arguments, though.)

However, if one's using a more sophisticated scanner, like a drum scanner (e.g. Tango?), where one can adjust the gain of the light source, etc., that's a different ballgame. That's not possible with any of the prosumer scanners of which I'm aware.

I do like Siverfast for reducing the effect of the mask when scanning color negative film. These are not different ICC profiles that are applied, which clip the image to the saturation of whatever target has been used to create the profile.. Silverfast has worked with different film manufacturers to arrive at "settings" that they internally apply for each type of film.

Yes, all of my advice here has been for the specific case of the V700, not a drum scanner with a PMT

My problem with Negafix and how Silverfast inverts negatives is that it's entirely dependent on what's in the frame. If you include any of the holder, or you have even a slightly different frame size or position than last time you scanned the same negative, the results will be different. I prefer reproducibility in my workflow to convenience.

[alanmcd]

I can agree with this, but how do you tell what is part of the neg and what is not?

[RHITMrB]

I can agree with this, but how do you tell what is part of the neg and what is not?

Your question confuses me. The holder doesn't let any light through, so it's pretty obvious on the scan.

[Jeff T]

I will recommend that you download the Silverfast Ai Studio. Silverfast SE is a free bundled with limited functions. Scan in raw HDR or HDRi format then process your raw files in HDR Studio, where you would make adjustments, then generate your desired output file. HDR Studio is where Silverfast shines.
It will load a 2Gb file in seconds and all adjustment rendered quickly, except for SRD (scratch & dust removal).

Dyes on BW film will appear as dusts in the infrared channel.

HDRi format is just raw plus infrared channel.

Usually it takes less time to scan in HDR than in 48bit Tiff mode.

I agree with RHITMrB about Negafix, but overall it's still better than other options available.

[djdister]

I'm not a big fan of Digital ICE or the scratch and removal (iSRD) scanning options, and really haven't had that many reasons to use it. I would only use those options if the negative was truly horrendous, because in effect you are trusting the software to automatically make corrections to the scan without your intervention or artistic intelligence.