RE: SilverFast (Good? Bad? Ugly?)

["Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm another chump with SilverFast (for an LS-2000). Worst money I ever
spent. Even if it wasn't buggy, it's user interface is about the worst I've
ever seen. The icons down the left of the preview window are tiny and
incomprehensible, and the only indication of the state of some of the
features they represent (e.g., autofocus mode) is a few pixels in the icon.
When I try to scan negatives, I get color all over the map, and can't figure
out why. The manual was obviously written by someone who knows the software
intimately, and assumes the reader also already knows the software
intimately. But the worst thing is that you can't get 48-bit scans out of
it, except in HDR mode, which is raw data only intended for feeding into
another program of theirs. I tried using this HDR output and assigning the
profile that was created by the IT8 calibration tool, but that didn't give
me the right color. I've given up on it. I rather like NikonScan.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@ix.netcom.com

> From: Jim Allen
>
> According to what I had read SilverFast was
> supposed to be great.  Since it was a couple of years ago, I can
> not recall
> all of the details, but I quickly became frustrated with SilverFast.  I
> learned how to use the Nikon program (since upgraded to a new version) and
> liked it quite a lot.  I abandoned SilverFast.  However, I felt
> guilty about
> it because the "pros" all liked SilverFast.

-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.