![]() ![]() That's a factor because I have a 50 slide batch feeder for my scanner and have at least 1000 boxes of slides to scan. ![]() Also in several cases, Vuescan's multi-exposure lost some detail in diagonal lines.Īnd Silverfast's multi-scan took only about 1/3 the time that Vuescan did. In direct comparisons, Silverfast's multi-exposure brought out a lot of additional shadow detail, but Vuescan's did not. Those Ektachromes have very little exposure latitude, and since many of them were shot in low-light situations like subway stations (I am a railroad enthusiast), a lot of them could also benefit from multi-exposure or dual exposure to bring out more shadow detail. The rest all all Ektachrome 400, push-processed by Kodak to 1600 or 3200. That said, I was able to do the evaluations that I described in my other thread which led me for my use case to select Silverfast. In contrast, Vuescan just superimposes wording that effectively conveys the point without totally obscuring the image. Like you, I think that this watermark obscures too much of the image. ![]() Click to expand.I agree with your issue about the size of the Silverfast watermark. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |