VueScan or Silverfast // Nikon 9000

[allan_schoening]

<p>Hello everyone,<br>

I want to use my Nikon 9000 again. What is your opinion with regards to software? Silverfast is significantly more expensive; is it that much better? My biggest concern is making sure I get the sharpest images possible. Thank you for your time and input. <br>

FYI - I'm using a Mac running 10.10.3. I've downloaded trial of VueScan and it works well. </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Is there something wrong with the Nikon software?</p>

[SCL]

<p>I got rid of Silverfast on my scanners and switched to Vuescan. Sharp images, IMHO are more to do with flatness of negatives than scanning software when used properly.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Nikon stopped updating with Windows XP. Your best option now is Vuescan or Silverfast, but you don't get all of the functionality of Nikonscan.</p>

<p>I'm a long-term Silverfast user. They're a large corporation with excellent resources, likely to be around for a long time. Vuescan is a one-man operation for programming and support. Functionally, either one works well.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Ed they may be a large corporation, but their customer support and willingness to honour their promises have a lot to be desired. Do a search here and you will find details of my story.</p>

<p>Vuescan is not a one man show. It's a family business. Every contact I made with them has been returned. Much more than I can say for the other guys.</p>

<p>As far as abilities are concerned, Vuescan is the cat's-meow if you want control over your scanning. Silverfast attempts to make a "one interface suits all" which makes it difficult for it to support specific features of any scanner.</p>

 

[q.g._de_bakker]

There is a workaround that makes Nikon Scan work on Windows versions newer than XP. It apparently can still be made to work on Windows 10 (see Windows 10 thread).<br>Just an FYI, because that will be no good when running the Nikon from a Mac.

[daniel_johnson6]

<p>There is a Vista version of Nikon Scan 4....I use with both Vista and Windows 7.</p>

<p> </p>

[Edwin Barkdoll]

<p>I've used Silverfast and Vuescan on Macs and although each has its idiosyncrasies and distinct learning curves, I've found little to distinguish between them regarding output.</p>

<p>There are significant differences regarding their business policies. I puchased the Vuescan Pro version for <$100USD a few years ago and have used it on my Nikon LS 4000 and LS 9000 with no problem. There is no charge for upgrades. Ed Hamrick has also been prompt and helpful, if terse, with any questions I have had.</p>

<p>In order to use Silverfast on my current Mac (10.9, MacBook Pro) i would need to upgrade from Silverfast 6.x for >$300 (I originally purchased SF 6.x in 2007 for >$300 I think). This would allow me ONLY to use the LS4000. To use the LS9000 I would need to purchase an additional license for >$300 as well.</p>

<p>Given that I detect no differences in scanning output of B&W negs, Velvia slides and old Kodachromes from the '60's I have come down squarely on the side of Vuescan if for no other reason than to save myself $700-800.</p>

 

[Uhooru]

<p>I still like Nikon scan better than Vuescan. But I have an old 2006 iMac running Tiger so I can use it as it doesn't seem to run on Yosemite or Mavericks and Nikon has stopped supporting it. My main problem with Vuescan is I could never get it to space correctly for 6x7 film or actually any Med Format film. I know its probably user error, but with the Nikon Scan it seemed so much easier. I'm using a Nikon LS 9000.</p>

[Edwin Barkdoll]

<p>Barry, I agree. I much preferred (sadly I'm using the past tense...) Nikon Scan. I've loaned out my old Mac running Tiger tho'. For a while it was worth keeping that machine around just to use NS.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>There is no shame in "locking a machine" in time to support specific hardware / software. Film and printing companies do it all the time. Get an older machine and keep an older OS on it.....just for your scanner. You will then be able to use your scanner with the software you prefer.</p>

[benny_spinoza]

I have used both Vuescan and silverfast on my ( now sold) Nikon 9000. I found that for some tricky lighting situations,

there was a big difference....silverfast did a better job with white balance. Also, I found that sometimes I got more

saturated color with silverfast. In many situations, Vuescan did a fine job. But I would give the nod to silverfast.

[Kat D.]

<p>Has anyone tried Nikon Scan on Apple OS 10.7 ? I have it on OS 10.6.8 and it works fine, even though it wasn't <em>supposed</em> to work in that OS.</p>

<p>Now I would like to upgrade to 10.7 so I can use an X-Rite i1 Display Pro which must have 10.7 or later (just ordered an Eizo monitor). I suspect Nikon Scan won't work in OS 10.7, but I thought I'd check since it wasn't supposed to work in 10.6.8, but it did.</p>

<p>I tried Vuescan and Silverfast some years ago and didn't care for them. I will stay on 10.6.8 as long as possible or keep another computer with it, if necessary, in order to use Nikon Scan.</p>

<p>I got the Eizo EX2 sensor (=Spyder4), which may be fine, but there are some criticisms of Spyders on net. I also have an Optix DP94 sensor but read it might not work well on wide-gamut monitor. These sensor issues slightly off the point......just explaining need for OS 10.7.</p>

[Kat D.]

<p>In case anyone else in same position: I found out that the X-Rite i1 Display Pro spec that says Mac users must be in OS 10.7 or higher only applies if you are using the X-Rite profiling software. If you are using different software, as I will, you can be in any OS that your software is compatible with. There are no drivers or anything for the i1 that would come into play and restrict OS. I would be using Eizo's Color Navigator, and there is a version that is compatible with my OS 10.6.8.</p>