I happened to try scanning an old (circa 1980) kodak 100 print neg the other
day using both vuescan and nikonscan. The colours have badly faded in the
neg, and it was really badly scratched by the squeeze plate in the camera
(an ancient 2nd hand Voigtlander). When I heard that Ed had introduced more
advanced filtering and colour restoration in 6.6, I thought I'd give it a
try.
If you go to and click on the "scanning" link in the left
hand menu, you'll go to a page whih has a comparison half way down between
Vuescan and Nikonscan. The Vuescan image was done using the long pass
option, the Clean filter and the restore colours option. The Nikonscan
image was done using the default settings, automatic contrast adjustment and
ICE. The colours in the Nikonscan image are horrible in comparison to the
Vuescan image, and there is far more useful detail in the Vuescan image.
However, Nikonscan has done a better job of removing the scratches, and some
of the other film damage. The clean filter has reduced the apparent grain
in the Vuescan image, possibly with some loss of sharpness, but Nikonscan
has introduced jaggies, which destroy any gain in sharpness. Using the
scour filter may have done a better job on the small spots in the river or
clouds.
On the face of this perhaps unfair test (since I didn't compare the scrub or
scour filters), ICE still seems to have an edge if the film being scanned is
badly damaged. However, for me the usefulness of ICE is lost due to
Nikonscan introducing jaggies. I *did* try the Vuescan scour filter in
preview mode, and it made little obvious difference to the scratches - I
suspect it would have been more effective on small spots. Vuescan dust
removal seems very effective under normal circumstances.
I am *really* impressed with the restore colour feature!! Well done, Ed!!
=8^)
Rob
PS I posted the picture to my site so I didn't send a 42K jpeg to the list.
