Epson: which software?

[Arne Norris]

I'm going to be getting an Epson 4990, or possibly a V700.

Is the Epson software OK or should I count on needing to get Vuescan or Silverfast? If so is one of these preferred for Epson scanners?

[domaz]

I would go with Silverfast or Vuescan. I think the main advantage of Silverfast over Vuescan is that Silverfast has the "real" licensed Digital ICE. Vuescan has it's own version of Digital ICE (Infrared clean) which works fine-but maybe not quite as well as Silverfast's. If you are scanning Black and Whites that won't matter to you since ICE doesn't work with B&W.

Other than that Vuescan is the winner hands-down in my opinion. Vuescan is easier to use and can be used on any platform you want (Mac,Linux,Windows) and is just plain better IMO.

[Daniel_Buck]

the epson software works just fine to me. I tried both silverfast and vuescan, but ended up just sticking with the epson scan software. I don't really use the ICE or grain reduction or sharpening, so maybe that's why I didn't find the silverfast or vuescan software any better than the epson. I'm scanning only B&W film, by the way.

[sully75]

I use the epson software. It's weird and a bit hard to control at first, but lately (4 months or so in) I feel able to make it do what I want. more or less. I tried the other stuff and couldn't make heads or tails of it.

If you get the 4990 I think you might want the betterscanning.com film holder.

[Nathan Potter]

And I use the Epson software for the V750. Don't use any imbedded corrections - all post scan adjustments are done in PS. Can't comment on Vuescan and Silverfast.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Robert Budding]

I would go with Silverfast or Vuescan. I think the main advantage of Silverfast over Vuescan is that Silverfast has the "real" licensed Digital ICE. Vuescan has it's own version of Digital ICE (Infrared clean) which works fine-but maybe not quite as well as Silverfast's. . .

Silverfast does not license Digital ICE from Kodak. They do, however, process the IR channel using their own code. Here's a link:

http://forum.silverfast.com/post22884.html

And here's what's to be found if you follow the link:

iSRD and ICE both use an additional scan with an infrared lightsource to automatically correct image defects. Contrary to ICE, iSRD also delivers the opportunity to influence this process with optional manual settings mode. To enhance an image even further, iSRD can be combined with traditional SRD, both there's an automatic iSRD mode which works as ICE does.

ICE is a trademark of Kodak Eastman, and must be licensed to use in a third party software product. iSRD had been developed by LaserSoft Imaging.

Please refer to the "iSRD / SRD Addendum" on our website for detailed information on how to use iSRD:
http://www.silverfast.com/documentation/en.html

best regards,

Thomas Luebker,
LaserSoft Imaging AG

This doesn't mean the Silverfast solution is bad. But it definably isn't Digital ICE.

[neil poulsen]

I prefer Silverscan for scanning color negatives. They have options for many different kinds of film, and they work fairly well at removing the orange mask that's typical in color negative films.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

Another vote for the Epson software. I tried the trial version of Silverfast that came with my 4990, but couldn't figure it out. Epsonscan is more user friendly and works just fine for me.

[Ben Syverson]

Yet another vote for Epson Scan. I actually do 75% of my color correction for color negatives in Epson Scan (via Levels), and scan directly to a high quality JPEG (at 2400 DPI). I use a 4990.

That gives me more than enough leverage to do the final 25% of the color, which is done as a Curves adjustment layer on top of the JPEG in Photoshop.

I own VueScan for tinkering reasons (it can output RAW scanner sensor data), but have never felt the need to use it for LF. SilverFast never did it for me.

[ljsegil]

Epson Scan. I must be just too dim to get Silverfast to produce anything worth the trouble involved. I use Vuescan occasionally if I want a RAW file to use with ColorPerfect software for negative inversion, otherwise I don't find Vuescan to do anything too much better than Epson Scan, but find it more difficult to use to get to the same result. YMMV, I think whichever package is most comfortable for you will get you similar results as any of the three.
Larry

[edtog]

I've been using Vuescan for scanning and all my colour correction is done using colorneg, with a final small tweak in Photoshop.

[Brian Ellis]

I have a 4990 and have used the Epson software, Vuescan, and Silverfast Ai for b&w film (no color). The Epson software's main advantage is that it's simple to use. The Epson software's main disadvantage is that it's simple to use because the reason it's simple is that it provides relatively few options and hence a somewhat lesser degree of control compared to Vuescan and Silverfast. The problem for me with Silverfast, and to a slightly lesser degree with Vuescan, is that all those options can make it difficult to learn. Silverfast's customer support was very good however and they have excellent tutorials on video. Vuescan's customer service seemed to vary, sometimes I'd get a response to an email message, sometimes I wouldn't.

[Arne Norris]

Thanks for all the responses so far!

I will be scanning both color neg and b&w neg medium format film. Right now I have a Canon 9900F and the Canon software, which does a relatively OK job with b&w neg film, now that I've learned how to over-ride and second-guess it. But scanning color negs are not very good.

Do all three of the software packages in question for the Epson handle color negs in the same manner?

[GreenStar]

...
Do all three of the software packages in question for the Epson handle color negs in the same manner?
If you're going to scan color negs you should use SilverFast's NegaFix tool (http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/negafix/en.html).

You can scan color negs with all 3 programs, but the results will largely vary in quality.
The best thing is to use SilverFast and to also color calibrate the scanner,
saves a lot of post-processing time while ensuring the original colors.

[mrladewig]

Except that in my experience scanning on an Epson, Silverfast sucks for scanning negs.

Unfortunately I don't have this same negative scanned in EpsonScan handy, but silverfast is always producing this blotchy watercolor effect when scanning color negatives on my 4990.
http://ladewigs.com/Gallery/d/2517-1/Silverfast-watercolor_effect_NPS160.jpg

I don't see any of that effect in EpsonScan. Both are crops from Fuji NPS160.
http://ladewigs.com/Gallery/d/2519-1/EpsonScan_no_watercolor.jpg

EpsonScan definitely requires more work when scanning negatives, but for me the results have been better as well.