Nikon Coolscan III or buy a new scanner?

[mcozturk]

I have a Nikon Coolscan III, which has a SCSI connector. I have learned that I can purchase a SCSI to USB connector from RAYTAC ($120) and a 3rd party scanner software from Hamrick ($40) to use the tool on my new Macs running OSX.

The total cost is $160 but I can buy a new scanner for that price - checked amazon, there are at least 10 scanners under $100 to do the job. Is my old Nikon still better than these new inexpensive scanners? Should I buy a new inexpensive scanner or invest in the scsi to usb adapter?

Thanks,

Mehmet

 

[Blue Velvet]

Although it wasn't a Nikon Coolscan, some years ago, we tried a SCSI to USB adapter for a scanner at work... which didn't work, no matter what we tried. Without being able to test things before buying, personally, I tend to try to avoid bodges and work-arounds. They can sometimes mean more time and sweat spent on flaky solutions.

However, being a dedicated film/transparency scanner, my hunch is that it will still deliver better results than a low-end (sub $100) scanner. If you raise your budget a little higher, take a look at something like a CanoScan 8800F ($160ish) or higher; mine's given good results from the occasional film scan. You could always sell the Coolscan on eBay or Craigslist to offset some of the cost.

 

[mcozturk]

Thanks! I have heard good things about the converter and the software. It makes sense to try them only if my old Coolscan III is much much better than the other inexpensive ones. I suspect it is though since the newer Nikon models cost thousands of dollars. The difference may be in things like focusing ability, color depth, etc. but I do not know enough to make a comparison between my Coolscan and the new slide scanners that cost under $150.

Mehmet

 

[pdxflint]

Thanks! I have heard good things about the converter and the software. It makes sense to try them only if my old Coolscan III is much much better than the other inexpensive ones. I suspect it is though since the newer Nikon models cost thousands of dollars. The difference may be in things like focusing ability, color depth, etc. but I do not know enough to make a comparison between my Coolscan and the new slide scanners that cost under $150.

Mehmet

Cool topic

I've got an older Nikon LS-30 SCSI scanner that I used to use with my old Blue & White G3 Mac tower running system 8.6... I put a SCSI card in the Mac, but haven't used the scanner since the old Mac was retired. If you get yours running, I'd be very interested in how it works, because that old scanner was seriously decent in it's time, and film sure hasn't changed any. It produced 30+meg .NEF files which were excellent when taking the time to get the settings for each negative or slide correct before the scan. You could also scan directly into .tiff files. I kind of miss using it. I still have the old Mac tower, so maybe I'll fire it up and put the scans on an external drive. Funny, but that old B/W Mac tower only had a 6gig drive, and 192mb RAM, but it ran Photoshop, Dreamweaver, scanned photos... lots of stuff. But, I always was careful about keeping my scans to a reasonable size because of storage... Now, many of my old scans are not as hi-res as I would do today...

I also have a newer, slightly higher resolution Nikon LS-50 ED usb 2.0 scanner that works fine, but the older scanner just seemed quicker and easier to use...

I haven't used any of the newer, inexpensive scanners with film or slides, but I don't see how they could be better than these solid Nikon scanners. Short of going upscale to hybrid or drum scanners, the Nikons are really the standard for film scanning.

 

[mcozturk]

Just an update:

I was able to run my Nikon CoolscanIII on my MacBook Pro running OS 10.5.8 using the VueScan scanner software and the RAYTAC U2SCX Ultra SCSI to USB adapter. It worked like a charm on my first try.

I had purchased the standard edition of the VueScan software but I had to upgrade it to the Pro version in order to be able to use the IT8 calibration.

I have also ordered the IT8 standard from Adoroma. More on this later...

Mehmet

 

[pdxflint]

Thanks for the update, and the info. I'm also running 10.5.8, so that might be a good thing to try on my LS-30 (Coolscan III.) I appreciate hearing about this as you get further along with it. Cheers.
-phil

 

[Eric-Jan]

an adapter lke that costs about 300 dollar or more… better buy a new scanner… or have an pc with SCSI card.

 

[bunnspecial]

an adapter lke that costs about 300 dollar or more… better buy a new scanner… or have an pc with SCSI card.

You're also replying to an 11 year old thread.

With that said, as long as the optics are clean, there are very few new scanners on the market at even double your stated $300 price point that can match the quality of a Coolscan III. Mine did have a dusty mirror when I first got it that gave very low contrast scans, but it was easy to clean.

The Coolscan V, which USB, is a very good(better) replacement but is ~$500. I have tested my III and V next to each other, and the V can "see" to a higher Dmax(not spec sheet, but my real-world testing) as well as seems to have better ICE. My Coolscan 8000 beats both of them, but it's an unwieldy and now reliably 4-figure beast that also runs on Firewire.

I will say that in my testing, all of these Nikon scanners work best when operated by Nikon Scan rather than Vuescan. Unfortunately, Nikon Scan, in its newest incarnation(version 4.x), is a Carbonized PPC program, which means you can run it on OS X 10.6.8 but nothing newer. If using USB, you should be able to run them in 10.6.8 virtual machine, but Firewire pass-through does not work in VMs. I THINK you need version 3.x to run the Coolscan III, and if I'm remembering right it's not a Carbon program so needs OS 9 and there's no hope of it running on an Intel Mac. When I had my III set up, I ran it on a PowerMac G4 in OS 9 and actually ran it as a Photoshop plug-in so that I could take advantage of the fact that I was using a dual CPU system.

I feel strongly enough about Nikon Scan that I've retained the ability to boot Snow Leopard on my 12-core 3.46ghz Mac Pro with 96gb of RAM primarily to drive my Coolscan 8000. It cranks out huge files that can definitely eat up a fair bit of RAM(plus the easy ability to jump directly over to Photoshop, where multiple layers chew up RAM and things like lens distortion correction and perspective correction eat CPU cycles for breakfast on files that size).

 

[Eric-Jan]

I came accross this post because i was looking for a solution for my CoolscanII, but if i have no PC option, i think i'll go for the Epson V600 which also does 6x6.

 

[bunnspecial]

Easiest and least expensive option is a Powermac G4, or another G4 era computer.

I have V700, which gathers dust for all but 4x5 transparencies and the rare occasions I do flats. Be ready to drop some extra money on the Better Scanning holders, especially if you want to do medium format film, and spend some time dialing the focus in.

A Coolscan III is going to kill the results from an Epson flatbed even if it's an "old" unit. Even the older Coolscan II is lower resolution and lacks ICE but still focuses more consistently than a V600.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Just an update:

I was able to run my Nikon CoolscanIII on my MacBook Pro running OS 10.5.8 using the VueScan scanner software and the RAYTAC U2SCX Ultra SCSI to USB adapter. It worked like a charm on my first try.

I had purchased the standard edition of the VueScan software but I had to upgrade it to the Pro version in order to be able to use the IT8 calibration.

I have also ordered the IT8 standard from Adoroma. More on this later...

Mehmet

VueScan is my favorite scanning application, and even the Pro version is relatively inexpensive. I use it with an Epson V700 scanner.

 

[bunnspecial]

VueScan is my favorite scanning application, and even the Pro version is relatively inexpensive. I use it with an Epson V700 scanner.

It's great if you overlook their terrible implementation of IR cleaning-and yes I have the pro version and have used it for years.

For color, for me, ICE is a game changer and there's no substitute for the real thing. That means on Nikon Scanners you need to use NikonScan and on Epson Scanners you have to use Epson Scan.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

It's great if you overlook their terrible implementation of IR cleaning-and yes I have the pro version and have used it for years.

For color, for me, ICE is a game changer and there's no substitute for the real thing. That means on Nikon Scanners you need to use NikonScan and on Epson Scanners you have to use Epson Scan.

Perhaps you are correct, but I prefer VueScan Pro over the rest, at least when using my old V700 scanner. I am not a pro, so I scan photos I took of my family and friends (35mm slides and a few 6"x5" or so photos)...every now and then.

I imagine that you won't agree with this article, but the features I like about any of these apps are explained:

Top 9 Best Photo Scanning Software

Scan your photos with this best photo scanning software.

fixthephoto.com

 

[bunnspecial]

Perhaps you are correct, but I prefer VueScan Pro over the rest, at least when using my old V700 scanner. I am not a pro, so I scan photos I took of my family and friends (35mm slides and a few 6"x5" or so photos)...every now and then.

I imagine that you won't agree with this article, but the features I like about any of these apps are explained:

Top 9 Best Photo Scanning Software

Scan your photos with this best photo scanning software.

fixthephoto.com

Maybe I'm picky, but I can't stand dust on my slide scans, and especially if they're in paper mounts getting rid of all of it is futile.

I love how many scanners Vuescan works with. I've quite literally dug up some of the most obscure things I could find and it worked with them. And yes, it's very capable software.

I'll also go on record as saying that I think Epson's software is awful, and Nikon Scan isn't great although I prefer its editing capabilities(if not intuitiveness) to Vuescan.

With that said, going back to my earlier statement about dust, ICE is a game changer. ICE has two components-the IR channel scanning, which is a scanner feature, and the algorithm that uses the IR channel scan to take care of dust and scratches.

ICE is a proprietary piece of software from Kodak and Applied Science Fiction that uses the IR channel scan to remove dust and scratches.

Epson Scan and Nikon Scan contain the ICE software package. Vuescan contains its own IR cleaning, but in side-by-side tests(which if I can find them I'm happy to post) I can show isn't as good.

I should mention that none of this is relevant if you'd scanning B&W film or Kodachrome, as IR channel scanning generally doesn't work on those. The Nikon Coolscan 9000 can use ICE on IR(I think it's the only consumer-class scanner that can) but most can't.

If you're comfortable with Vuescan, it's a wonderful piece of software, and as I mentioned I've had a license for it since the mid-2000s(that was a great investment). When push comes to shove, though, I find that the manufacturer's software, however awful it is, can often get the best results out of the scanner. What Vuescan does offer is a consistent interface across scanners, and that IS an advantage for someone like me who, for example, uses a V700 along side a Coolscan V and Coolscan 8000. Admittedly, though, my V700 does sit a lot now because I don't scan many flats, and its only film scanning use for me now is for 4x5.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Maybe I'm picky, but I can't stand dust on my slide scans, and especially if they're in paper mounts getting rid of all of it is futile.

I love how many scanners Vuescan works with. I've quite literally dug up some of the most obscure things I could find and it worked with them. And yes, it's very capable software.

I'll also go on record as saying that I think Epson's software is awful, and Nikon Scan isn't great although I prefer its editing capabilities(if not intuitiveness) to Vuescan.

With that said, going back to my earlier statement about dust, ICE is a game changer. ICE has two components-the IR channel scanning, which is a scanner feature, and the algorithm that uses the IR channel scan to take care of dust and scratches.

ICE is a proprietary piece of software from Kodak and Applied Science Fiction that uses the IR channel scan to remove dust and scratches.

Epson Scan and Nikon Scan contain the ICE software package. Vuescan contains its own IR cleaning, but in side-by-side tests(which if I can find them I'm happy to post) I can show isn't as good.

I should mention that none of this is relevant if you'd scanning B&W film or Kodachrome, as IR channel scanning generally doesn't work on those. The Nikon Coolscan 9000 can use ICE on IR(I think it's the only consumer-class scanner that can) but most can't.

If you're comfortable with Vuescan, it's a wonderful piece of software, and as I mentioned I've had a license for it since the mid-2000s(that was a great investment). When push comes to shove, though, I find that the manufacturer's software, however awful it is, can often get the best results out of the scanner. What Vuescan does offer is a consistent interface across scanners, and that IS an advantage for someone like me who, for example, uses a V700 along side a Coolscan V and Coolscan 8000. Admittedly, though, my V700 does sit a lot now because I don't scan many flats, and its only film scanning use for me now is for 4x5.

What I do is to dust the slides before placing them on the scanner's tray, then remove any remaining dust and scratches using photo-editing software in my computer. But VueScan uses a very good dust removal algorithm.

I haven't scanned ay of my slides for over a year now

 

[bunnspecial]

What I do is to dust the slides before placing them on the scanner's tray, then remove any remaining dust and scratches using photo-editing software in my computer. But VueScan uses a very good dust removal algorithm.

I haven't scanned ay of my slides for over a year now

Here's a comparison I threw together several years ago with a random negative from probably 2007ish taken on Kodak 400UC(a negative and not a slide, but the comparison stands). This was most likely processed by a Walmart on-site "One Hour" lab and I picked it because it has a nasty scratch and I like the composition enough that I think it might have potential if I wanted to massage it.

Don't remember the exact equipment, but a Canon New F-1 with a 50mm f/1.4 would be a good bet. It was plenty sharp.

First of all, the negative with no correction on the Coolscan V in Vuescan

I'm going to pay particular attention to an area on the truck back window since it has a prominent scratch and several dust spots.

First of all, a crop of that area with no correction

Now, Vuescan with the dust and scratch reduction cranked up to high

Notice that while both the scratch and the dust are reduced, they're still there.

Compare that to ICE from Nikon Scan

A couple of the bigger dust spots are still visible, but the scratch is gone completely as are the smaller ones.

BTW, wet scanning can basically eliminate the appearance of dust and can minimize scratches. I've wet scanned on my V700, but it's royal pain and it's even more frustrating when you see a bubble you missed.

Also, as scan prep, I typically use a Pec pad with Kodak film cleaner(the nasty stuff that works amazing) and then use canned air to make sure. Still, though, dust is a persistent enemy and you're probably not getting rid of it unless you're in a clean room. As I mentioned above, paper slide mounts are probably the worst about this, and when I use a lab that I know uses them I request unmounted and hand mount myself in plastic(I need to fix my Coolscan IV and get a roll adapter for it so that I can scan a complete roll before mounting).

Is this splitting hairs? Maybe, but to be happy with the Vuescan output I often spend twice as much time in Photoshop healing and cloning as I would a direct output from Nikonscan or Epson Scan.

I have an Epson Scan comparison around too that I can post...

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Those are good examples, but so far I am very pleased with VueScan Pro, CS6, & Photo Lab for scanning 35mm slides. The last scans from slides are of my children. Much easier to scan slides than photos on paper, and the colors from Kodachrome slides were wonderful.

 

[dimme]

Around 10 years ago I worked in a PRO color lab and had access to a array od scanners from drum to flatbed and an bunch in-between. I spent many Saturdays scanning my film collection. However at the time I only scanned by best shots & my slide collection. Now I came across a few boxes of black and white negatives from many years ago. I have a epson V600 and a Minolta scanner, the latter I need to work on. But I decided to give DSLR scanning a try. I must say I am very impressed with the results. Sure it's not as good as a drum scanner or flextight. But it is way better that the epson and capturing in RAW makes adjustments endless. There is no ICE but as mentioned above it does not work with B&W. I using a Nikon 55mm macro lens w/PK13 and a Nikon ES1 slide copier on a D90 body ( I wanted a smaller file size so I'm not using a FF body) I had to extend the es-1 a bit to work with the D90. But found and adapter on eBay which was a Nikon K Style Extension Tube Tube. I just use the center part which are 52mm rings.