Epson V700 and Silverfast 16 bit scanning

[feppe]

The Epson driver supports 48-bit color, doesn't it ?

I'm not familiar with the 700, but on my 4990, I prefer it to Silverfast and VueScan.

Haven't really tested it out, yet, but just checked, and it does. Epson Scan has much better UI - no surprise there as SilverFast is a German program, and the only other German software I've used (SAP) also has a horrendous UI :P

I'll do some test scans later this week.

[Tyler Boley]

it's a good idea, once you teach it to not clip your files like crazy, it can be perfectly adequate... and free! I didn't realize 48 bit color would be considered an upgrade option.
Tyler

[feppe]

it's a good idea, once you teach it to not clip your files like crazy, it can be perfectly adequate... and free! I didn't realize 48 bit color would be considered an upgrade option.
Tyler

Bundled software is not designed to be used as is, but to entice people to upgrade to the non-crippled version. Think of it as highly targeted advertising.

Epson Scan doesn't seem to do ProPhoto or even be able to use ICC profiles which is a real shame. I would imagine the hardware is capable of capturing a wider gamut than aRGB.

[Tyler Boley]

it's buried in the prefs worded quite badly, sorry I can't recall where. But there is a color managed workflow, with input profiles that will convert to assignable output working spaces. I'll try to find it when I can get back to the info in a few days.
They word it as though if you want "accurate" scans, it's some kind of an exception to "normal".

[feppe]

it's buried in the prefs worded quite badly, sorry I can't recall where. But there is a color managed workflow, with input profiles that will convert to assignable output working spaces. I'll try to find it when I can get back to the info in a few days.
They word it as though if you want "accurate" scans, it's some kind of an exception to "normal".

ICM option is in the Configuration panel in Color tab, but it doesn't have ProPhoto nor does it have any of the ICC profiles I have installed and available for other applications. There is no apparent way to add more profiles or color spaces, and help file isn't very helpful, either

Looks like that 16-bit (SilverFast's 48-bit) is only available in Ai according to this which is not cheap at 99 EUR. And if I want Multi-Exposure that doubles the price and then some - then again, Multi-Exposure seems to be a feature which can be duplicated by scanning the same image twice at different settings. Also not a fan of the fact that if I buy another scanner I need a "cross-upgrade" even if I use the same program.

[Tyler Boley]

I just don't recall how we did it, but t was screwy. I don't believe it accesses profiles from their regular location. If you can do a search for one of their supplied profiles that is showing up, and find what folder it accesses, then copy over whatever others you want to there, it may work.
Why all these manufacturers don't stick to standards instead of their own goofy setups is baffling, just makes them look bad.

[Kirk Gittings]

Feppe, I haven't used it in awhile but when I was regularly using SF the multi-exposure feature had problems-because registration of the scans was always slightly off introducing some softness. It did give better shadow detail with less noise. I believe the reason for the softness was actually in the scanner. At this price point scanners do not have a super accurate step motor so no two scans are precisely the same size in the direction the scan.The SF registration software could not handle the slight difference in size of the scans. This may have been corrected in later versions of the software.

[feppe]

Feppe, I haven't used it in awhile but when I was regularly using SF the multi-exposure feature had problems-because registration of the scans was always slightly off introducing some softness. It did give better shadow detail with less noise. I believe the reason for the softness was actually in the scanner. At this price point scanners do not have a super accurate step motor so no two scans are precisely the same size in the direction the scan.The SF registration software could not handle the slight difference in size of the scans. This may have been corrected in later versions of the software.

Was reading about that on their forums earlier today, and that's still the case. SF developers have made improvements in recent versions, and are working on a new one which makes full 2D alignment - currently it apparently aligns only on one axis.

It might be easier just to do the scans separately, one for hilights, one for shadows, and blend them manually in post.

I'm not looking for absolute best quality, but much of my shooting has deep shadows which are tough to get good scans with. The best shots will be drum scanned, or at least done with Imacon; couple of shops here which offer them by the hour.

I'll try to figure out Epson Scan's ICM this weekend, as that would save me 200 EUR...

[mrladewig]

I don't know if this was answered, but if they're still bundling silverfast SE with the scanner, then no it does not do 16bit color scans out of the box. The EpsonScan software included does offer 16bit color. Or you can upgrade to Silverfast Ai or higher to gain 16bit color scans. In any case I think both software packages refer to the setting as 24bit (8X3) or 48bit (16X3) color.

I don't know what native capability of the Epson is, but I strongly suspect it is 12bit or 14bit.

[D. Bryant]

I thought the benefits of a 16 bit workflow were settled years ago?

Unfortunately to this day there are still people on the internet who will argue that 8bit capture and editing are just as good as 16 bit. I suppose some people still think the earth is flat.

Don Bryant