Prev: scanner question..please help
Next: What scanning software?
From: Alan Wrigley on 19 Dec 2009 07:53
Noons <wizofoz2k(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Alan Wrigley wrote,on my timestamp of 19/12/2009 8:20 PM:
>
> >> You have to turn on color management in Nikonscan and chose and install one
of
> >
> >> the many profiles available. You'll need to let Nikonscan use the same
> > profile
> >> for display and scanning and also install the same profile in your Windows
> >> screen settings. Ideally they should all match, but of course you can
incur
> > the
> >> overhead of on-the-fly profile matching.
> >
> > But surely the question is: since the preview and the full scan are both
coming
> > from the same scanner and being displayed on the same screen by the same
piece
> > of software, at which point in the chain is a different colour profile being
> > used and why?
>
> And surely the answer is: if you don't tell Nikonscan which color profile to
> scan with and Windows which color profile to display with, you are in a mess.
> Nikonscan displays nothing, Windows does. Read on the subject, it's worth it.

Are you deliberately missing my point? BOTH scans, the preview and the full, are
produced by NikonScan and displayed by Windows. So both should be subject to the
same colour profiles at every step. So why are they different?

Alan
From: Alan Wrigley on 19 Dec 2009 08:25
I myself personally speaking wrote:

> BOTH scans, the preview and the full, are produced by NikonScan and displayed
> by Windows. So both should be subject to the same colour profiles at every
> step. So why are they different?

Sorry, that was worded a little sloppily. What I meant was that both images are
produced and displayed by the same software (NikonScan) using the same Windows
display system on the same monitor.

Alan
From: Barry Watzman on 19 Dec 2009 12:43
There is a set of checkboxes somewhere to turn on which final scan
features will be effective for the preview scan. Many times, the only
purpose of the preview scan is to set crop areas, so people prefer to
turn off digital ICE, auto-exposure and even auto focus to make the
preview scan go faster (it is a very big difference, it can be a minute
or more).


Alan Wrigley wrote:
> I myself personally speaking wrote:
>
>> BOTH scans, the preview and the full, are produced by NikonScan and displayed
>> by Windows. So both should be subject to the same colour profiles at every
>> step. So why are they different?
>
> Sorry, that was worded a little sloppily. What I meant was that both images are
> produced and displayed by the same software (NikonScan) using the same Windows
> display system on the same monitor.
>
> Alan
From: Noons on 20 Dec 2009 07:48
Alan Wrigley wrote,on my timestamp of 20/12/2009 12:25 AM:

>> BOTH scans, the preview and the full, are produced by NikonScan and displayed
>> by Windows. So both should be subject to the same colour profiles at every
>> step. So why are they different?
>
> Sorry, that was worded a little sloppily. What I meant was that both images are
> produced and displayed by the same software (NikonScan) using the same Windows
> display system on the same monitor.


When Nikonscan displays the preview, it displays it using the scanner's profile,
if you have no colour profiling. The final scan file will be displayed using
whatever default Windows uses (sRGB IIRC?).

Let me make this perfectly clear: *in the absence of any colour profiling set in
Nikonscan*, the default scanner hardware and OS profiles will be assumed by
Nikonscan. They are different for preview and final scan display. Hence the
difference. It's not major, but it's there.

Turn on colour profiling, set it and watch the difference. Or rather: the
similarity, between preview and full scan.


I'm of course assuming the OP previewed just before scanning. It's only too
easy to do for example an auto-exposure as a default operation before each full
scan - and change the entire resulting image compared to the preview!

There is a Nikonscan property that forces an auto-exposure before each full
scan. A preview does not do an auto-exposure before each preview. Right there
is the potential for *big* differences. Worth checking if set, just in case.
From: Alan Wrigley on 20 Dec 2009 13:09
Noons <wizofoz2k(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Alan Wrigley wrote,on my timestamp of 20/12/2009 12:25 AM:
>
> >> BOTH scans, the preview and the full, are produced by NikonScan and
displayed
> >> by Windows. So both should be subject to the same colour profiles at every
> >> step. So why are they different?
> >
> > Sorry, that was worded a little sloppily. What I meant was that both images
are
> > produced and displayed by the same software (NikonScan) using the same
Windows
> > display system on the same monitor.

> Let me make this perfectly clear: *in the absence of any colour profiling set
in
> Nikonscan*, the default scanner hardware and OS profiles will be assumed by
> Nikonscan. They are different for preview and final scan display. Hence the
> difference. It's not major, but it's there.

Thanks for that explanation. It makes it much clearer, because I assumed that
NikonScan would use the same profile for any image it displays. After all, the
whole point of a preview is to see what the finished product will look like.

Although I didn't ask the original question, I was interested because I see the
same thing with VueScan and the Nikon 5000 - a very noticeable difference in
colour balance between preview and scan (but not on every scan which is the
puzzling bit).

Alan
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: scanner question..please help
Next: What scanning software?