RE: SilverFast (Good? Bad? Ugly?)

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

The fact that it won't do 48-bit scans (except raw output to HDR) is pretty
much fatal to me. In a program that costs as much as hundreds of megabytes
of MS Office, and touts itself as full-featured, this is utterly
inexcusable.

Negafix sounds like it could be a plus--I didn't upgrade, since I couldn't
see throwing good money after bad--but I'm not sure that NikonScan doesn't
do the same thing, since I get excellent color from my negatives with it.

I used the IT8 target to calibrate SilverFast, but didn't notice any great
improvement, over either SilverFast out of the box or NikonScan.

Are there any other features or qualities that make you rave about it? I
just don't get it.

--

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

> From: Tunney Moriarty
>
> I wouldn't be without it.. nor I do I believe that there is
> software on the market that can come even close to what it can do.

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