When the scanned material is thick, the signal is close to the noise floor of the CCD, and so the noise, which is always random in nature, has a greater influence on the resulting pixel. The idea behind multiscanning is that it takes several samples of the same spot. Perhaps the noise the Epson generates is so consistent/non-random Vuescan can't determine what's noise and what's not. I did notice a difference with my Minolta and previous scanner. It can have a minor effect on the apparent sharpness because the light is uncollimated, but it’s not a real loss of sharpness but rather just a slight loss of micro contrast which is why it helps with softening the grain a little as well as the scratches.I haven't noticed any difference with my Epson scanner. The grain dissolver helps reduce the appearance of scratches by softening the light so it’s less directional. The grain dissolver will increase the scan time a little because it’s a translucent material that is physically inserted between the light source and the negative to soften the light.
I would recommend enabling the grain dissolver in Vuescan and skip the multiple samples. In some cases the slides were slightly under exposed and the extra passes helped me pull just what little detail was in the murk of the shadows. Where I found the multiple exposures or passes to be especially helpful was when working with old Kodachrome slides. Sadly, I haven’t found that Vuescan does a particular good job with dust and scratches with my 5400 compared to the Nikon LS-50 I also have. The grain dissolver helped reduce the appearance of scratches a little because the light is more diffuse, but it was even more helpful with Fuji films in reducing the appearance of the pepper grain. I use the Scan Elite 5400 and have found that unless the negative is REALLY dense, the multipass/exposure made little difference except in extra time even when scanning negatives that are 50+ years old.
0 kommentar(er)
