If you get an error, screenshot and share. If the above works ok, then copy/paste this command and enter into command line:Ĭ: & cd "Users\rocci\Documents\NegativeLabPro.lrplugin" & win\exiftool.exe -m -overwrite_original -E -UniqueCameraModel="Vuescan RAW" -xmp:CameraProfile="Negative Lab v2.1" "C:\Users\rocci\Pictures\2020\\raw0036.dng"Īgain, you should get no error… just some kind of confirmation that the file was changed after a minute or so. If you do get errors, take a screenshot and share. You shouldn’t get any errors, it should just show instructions for using exiftool. Open up the command prompt, and copy/paste this and hit enter:Ĭ: & cd "Users\rocci\Documents\NegativeLabPro.lrplugin" & win\exiftool.exe If that doesn’t fix it, I would try putting part of that command in the command prompt and see if Some of the earlier 8.x version of Lightroom Classic had issues with folder permission and writing to file. It might get down to a question of what you prefer.Thanks I would try updating your version of Lightroom to the latest version (LR Classic 9.1). I just want some opinions from users of Silverfast. What I personally think you are going to find is that each package is going to yield a fairly decent result, with some differences that can probably attributed to differences in the programs. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next of 8 plasticman Members 4.1k Erfahrener Benutzer City: Stockholm 1 Posted Febru(edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm considering the hitherto unthinkable: switching from Vuescan to Silverfast. Less sure with Epson Scan, I haven't used it in several years. I am reasonably sure that it can be accomplished with Silverfast and Lasersoft, since I have used them both. The above might give you some idea on the basic differences between each software package. This was in part because each app's varying tone curves and sharpening tended to emphasize grain differently in the first place, and also because I mostly tended to shoot only film at ISO 800 or below. 2) Discontinued hardware + current OS Ai Studio. VueScan handles grain better than rivals Grain reduction was tricky to judge. The pattern seems to be: 1) Current hardware + OS SilverFast 8 SE or Ai Studio. Something like Adobe RGB (1998) available on each. The more expensive 'pro' versions of Silverfast are supported for longer so this is why many older scanners will have only a Pro version of Silverfast available for sale. * Color Space - not sure on this one, but you should have * USM application in PS or PSE with same on each image Weakness: The bloated UI and menu system make Vuescan extremely difficult to use and the available. That shouldn't have to adjust it for what you are attempting. * Curve-With the image you have I would make the case All software has a learning curve, but your VueScan is already paid for and is excellent. I also have a brand new copy of Silverfast that I will not even bother to load onto my computer. * Mid-point, or mid-level brightness- identical on each If you have VueScan already, just update it (free) online and use it. ![]() * black and white points - just bring them in far enough to I do have silverfast, and I do use it a bit, but I just feel I get better more accurate results from vuescan. So far with version 8 I've had free upgrades to my full SilverFast Ai and HDR package but there is an implied threat that at some point in time a major. I mostly get better results with Vuescan. The SilverFast user interface isn't intuitive - but neither is VueScan for me - and I've seen many worse software packages and overall it is a lot simpler than Photoshop to learn and use 5. And, of course, the cost of Vuescan is certainly a no-brainer. * film profile - same on each, may not be possible Obviously, the 'real time' view of any manipulations in Silverfast may be a huge benefit. So possibly you could do it by just concentrating on the basics. Having said all that, I would expect that trying to replicate identical settings between each package would a bit probable at best. You really want to be able to control your test by setting up the scan variables so that they are as close to being the same for the three programs as can achieve. I think the problem that you encounter with using the program's 'auto' settings, or 'basic' settings, is that you are getting a result that is predicated on a programmer's ideas on how the image should appear.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |