Capture NX2 - any problems dealing with 16 bit scans?

[robin_barnes]

<p>I recently bought a Plustek scanner with Silverfast Ai Studio software and am currently learning to use these. It had been my intention to produce the best quality unadjusted scans with Silverfast and then use Photoshop Elements (version 8 for Mac) for the any adjustments. However I have just found out that if the scans are 16 bit, rather than 8 bit, many of the features of PSE become unavailable.<br>

It has occurred to me that one answer would be to use NX2 instead of PSE. So far as I am aware NX2 is able to cope with 16 bit files without any restrictions on the tools that can be used. Is this right or will I still run into problems? </p>

 

[lornesunley]

<p>I have used NX2 to manipulate 16 bit TIFF scans from my Plustek scanner without any problems .... and that was with the older 32 bit version of NX2. With the 64 bit version 2.3 it seems to work better. You can same the modifications to the TIFF file by doing a "Save As" and saving the modified image as a NEF file allowing you to make changes to your edits without having to do them all over from the original TIFF file.</p>

[robin_barnes]

<p>Thank you Lorne that's just what I wanted to hear.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>In my experience, NX2 is very slow in reading and editing scanned files (at least if they're typical high res scans). I would use something else.</p>

[mark_stephan2]

<p>I agree with Lorne. I scan with a CoolScan V ED and use the latest version of NX2 without any problems. I use a fast quad core pc with lots of ram and that makes a real difference regarding speed.</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>I'm not sure why anyone would choose to use NX2 for non-RAW files. Mine constantly crashes while trying to save TIFFs and has the most frustrating editing interface ever invented IMHO. The simple drop down dialogs of PS are much quicker to use. PhotoShop also never hides my opened images behind a browser pane (or pain!), from where they have to be dragged every time.</p>

[lachaine]

<p>You could just get the scanning exposure and colour balance right the first time, and then you won't need those gigantic, slow 48 bit files at all. Personally, I've found that there isn't really much advantage in scanning at 16-bits per channel, because you do have time to get it right. Anything else you do after that isn't about exposure doesn't need 16 bits.</p>

[western_isles]

<p>I use Capture NX2 with 16bit scans at 100Mb+ and it does work. However, it is slow at times and you should search the forum for potential problems using Capture NX2. I have experienced a lot of problems as have other people so I would first use a trial copy before you buy. In my own case the problems became so bad I purchased Photoshop CS5 Extended and now use both which works well with Windows 7 but I would not rely on Capture NX2 on it's own. Capture can save 16 bit files as is or as 16 bit.<br>

Apart from very poor management at Nikon, see my other posts re this, I actually enjoy using the software both for RAW and scanned transparencies. The on line Technical help guys at Nikon are very good and I can reccommend them help without reservation.</p>

<p> </p>