Viewscan: now this is a weird one...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roger Moss
  • Start date Start date
R

Roger Moss

Having used Viewscan (Pro) for ages for film scanning, with no real
problems, I suddenly find that scans to preview are incredibly slow -
multiple stop/start stepping, as if waiting for the data to transfer through
a slow connection.

Thing is, the subsequent scan remains as fast as before. Device Manager
shows no apparent conflicts with the Adaptec SCSI card.

So what has happened? Sigh...

RM

P4 2000, WinXP Home, Canon FS2710.
 
Roger Moss said:
Having used Viewscan (Pro) for ages for film scanning, with no real
problems, I suddenly find that scans to preview are incredibly
slow - multiple stop/start stepping, as if waiting for the data to
transfer through a slow connection.
Click to expand...

You didn't mention the VueScan version, is it a recent or an old one?
You may also want to check if the cables are still connected well, and
you could try disconnecting the cables and reconnecting them to make
sure the connectors make good contact.
Thing is, the subsequent scan remains as fast as before. Device
Manager shows no apparent conflicts with the Adaptec SCSI card.
Click to expand...

Do you have any other SCSI devices in the chain? Have you added new
peripherals, maybe on USB? I don't know the specifics of your scanner
model, but maybe the lamp is aging and it takes longer to calibrate
before scanning?
 
Roger Moss said:
Having used Viewscan (Pro) for ages for film scanning, with no real
problems, I suddenly find that scans to preview are incredibly slow -
multiple stop/start stepping, as if waiting for the data to transfer
through a slow connection.
Click to expand...

Did you accidentally change the preview resolution setting? A lower value
will result in a faster preview scan.

Paul
 
Having used Viewscan (Pro) for ages for film scanning, with no real
problems, I suddenly find that scans to preview are incredibly slow -
multiple stop/start stepping, as if waiting for the data to transfer through
a slow connection.
Click to expand...

That's not new. It's just another *recurring* VueScan bug. See below.

Don.

--- start ---
I'm using VueScan with Canon FS4000US over SCSI connection. Just
upgraded from 8.1.32 to 8.1.36 and noticed a problem with "Preview"
command. In version 36 it takes forever, compared to version 32.
Apparently, version 36 does preview at full resolution (4000dpi) even
though the "Input | Preview resolution" is manually set to mere 500dpi.
Click to expand...
--- end ---
 
Having used Viewscan (Pro) for ages for film scanning, with no real
problems, I suddenly find that scans to preview are incredibly slow -
multiple stop/start stepping, as if waiting for the data to transfer through
a slow connection.
Click to expand...

If you are stuck (or interested) you could enable the 'log' option to
record all the SCSI commands for a session. The log file is text but
rather esoteric. Dave Burns (burnsorama.com) has some freeware that
interprets the log file.
 
Don said:
That's not new. It's just another *recurring* VueScan bug.

Don.
Click to expand...

Don,
Can you point me to some other software besides VueScan? I have a
DiMage ScanDual IV, and the Minolta software that comes with it just
plain sucks.
Thanks for any advice.
 
SNIP
Can you point me to some other software besides VueScan? I
have a DiMage ScanDual IV, and the Minolta software that
comes with it just plain sucks.
Click to expand...

The Minolta software sucks according to you, in what respect?
Have you investigated Silverfast software as an alternative:
<http://www.silverfast.com/product/Canon/384/en.html> ?

As for VueScan, Don's information about VueScan is dated and solely
based on (selected by him) user feedback (which by itself isn't
always a reliable source, user/hardware error and all) and isn't based
on personal experience with the scanner described. In fact, for some
reason, he doesn't like/understand the interface, and therefore (is
there a shrink in the house?) he rehashes old (by now mostly resolved)
issues that once were.

Case in point, in the message you responded to he apparently pointed
to a speed issue (around 02 Mar 2005) with a free 8.1.32 to 8.1.36
VueScan upgrade and a different scanner than the OP mentioned, when we
are obviously more than a year and several new features beyond that
stage, and at version 8.3.43.

Have you tried the latest VueScan version? I've read that there were
occasional IR dust/scratches removal (alternative to Canon's FARE)
issues with the FS4000 (is that the model *you* are referring to?)
over time, due to the particular error prone (projection offset)
method chosen by Canon, but I have no personal experience to
corroborate that, or whether that is still the case for that scanner
model.

Bart
 
Don,
Can you point me to some other software besides VueScan? I have a
DiMage ScanDual IV, and the Minolta software that comes with it just
plain sucks.
Thanks for any advice.
Click to expand...

The only other software I'm aware of is SilverFast at:
http://www.silverfast.com/
where you can download trial versions. However, there's a different
version for each scanner so you have to navigate the site to find it.

But the main question is what you expect scanner software to do?

It's very important to realize that there are two distinct components
of scanner software: scanning (i.e. digitizing film data) and
processing (i.e. image editing).

Most people confuse this built-in image editing with scanning. This
image editing has absolutely nothing to do with scanning and is there
only as a matter of convenience for people who don't have a separate
editing program. However, any such built-in editing is very limited
because the main purpose of scanning software is to scan, not edit.

Which then goes back to the above question. If you are after high
quality then you should not be relying on scanner software for
editing. You should really scan raw and do the editing in dedicated
image editing software which has the full complement of tools not the
cut-down and limited sub-set found in most scanner software.

And for that purpose (scanning without editing) virtually all software
supplied with the scanner will do the job very nicely (if you turn
everything else off!). After all if the manufacturer doesn't know the
hardware who does? Where this software usually comes short is editing,
but as I mention above, that's not really its primary job.

Whatever the case, VueScan is not really suitable for any serious
scanning. It may be OK for a quick and dirty (tiny) JPG to be posted
on a Web site, but not for anything else.

However, for some people who don't care for quality VueScab may do the
trick assuming they can get to grips with the inane "user interface".
Nevertheless, for such people with a very low threshold I would only
advise to find a version with the fewest bugs (for their use) and
stick with it! Don't upgrade automatically but (if you must upgrade)
wait for others to identify the bugs first. And - most of all (!) -
*keep* your old version! People regularly post desperate messages here
regretting the upgrade and wanting to go back to "the devil they know"
but the author is too ashamed of the amateur bugs to archive old
versions on his site.

Don.
 
As for VueScan, Don's information about VueScan is dated
Click to expand...

.... rabid and incoherent ranting omitted ...

In the interest of full disclosure that's from someone who himself
doesn't use VueScan because it's too buggy! For example:

--- start ---
Unfortunately, to date VueScan is not capable of scanning
the Raw data with a linear gamma... ....
There is IMHO an issue with the specific combination of
VueScan and the DSE-5400, only noticable by the more critical
Click to expand...
--- end ---

Translation:
Bart doesn't use VueScan with his Minolta because of VueScan bugs.

However, that doesn't stop Bart from lashing out uncontrollably when
there's even a hint of VueScan criticism no matter how calm, justified
or factual. Indeed, Bart obsesses with VueScan criticism!

Don.


P.S. And here's a short excerpt (growing all the time!) which Bart
doesn't want you to know or see:

--- arbitrary start ---

I had a similarly negative experience with VueScan:
I tried VueScan with the Minolta Dimage Scan MultiPRO and found it
unusable because of severe banding problems.


Unfortunately, to date VueScan is not capable of scanning the Raw data
with a linear gamma...

Yes that'll be one of the effects the VueScan D-max bug will cause.
Click to expand...

But: being a novice in the
trade I could not determine for myself that what was claimed: Vuescan
supports Minolta Scan Dual IV, wasn't true.


Tried that. It doesn't help.
I tried all the avenues that Vuescan allowed and no combination of features
provided a good scan. Your suggestion even made things worse.
Click to expand...


So this bug has survived through two subsequent versions to 8.1.13,
rendering Vuescan more-or-less useless, if you use scan-from-disk
workflow.

ICE manages to clean my problematic slides very well, doing a much more
complete job, and much more "seamlessly". Vuescan leaves so much, and
leaves obviously softened areas.

I'm really getting tired of even
trying new releases, it's a time consuming waste of time.

Somewhere around recent version .20 "something bad happened" to Vuescan
speed. Since then, several new version descriptions have promised
greatly improved speed etc. Atleast as of .23, my personal experience
is it's still very pokey.

About a couple of weeks ago I bought Vuescan to use with my brand new
Minolta. I was worried about reports of lines but was told that has
been fixed. IT HASN'T!! The damn lines are everywhere! Vuescan is total
CRAP! I wrote two emails but got no reply and I'm really fed up and
pissed off! I WANT MY MONEY BACK! What a ripoff! It's Vue-SCAM! That's
what it is!

I'm using VueScan with Canon FS4000US over SCSI connection. Just
upgraded from 8.1.32 to 8.1.36 and noticed a problem with "Preview"
command. In version 36 it takes forever, compared to version 32.
Apparently, version 36 does preview at full resolution (4000dpi) even
though the "Input | Preview resolution" is manually set to mere 500dpi.

I just updated to 8.2.03, and I'm getting "double" images side by side
of the SAME scans in the preview OR scan window..

Eddie Wiseman

...After I disabled batch mode and pressed
'Scan', VueScan went on to scanning all six frames in batch mode,
despite that fact that I explicitly asked it to scan only one frame.

What's going on with VueScan? Apparently, nobody is even trying to do
even the most basic testing of the new version before the release.
Click to expand...

So it looks like a serious bug with the cropping system, as you suggest. Don
will say "told you so" -well, he did! Stick to your working version.
Upgrade at your peril!
Click to expand...
Would if I could. I'm on his black list, since venting here regarding
Vuescan's undocumented feature of assigning icc profiles to raw file if
scan-from-disk outputting new raw file is done "at save".

Do you know for certain that you are blacklisted and that it is a result of
your posts to this NG? I don't remember any of your posts regarding the
above as being particularly damning.

The thread titled:

"Vuescan raw files saved "at save" have altered color balance"

prompted Ed Hamrick to email me with the good news. He mentioned his
action was in light of my recent Usenet posting.

Well I just tried the latest version, 8.3.03, and I'm seeing the same
exact effects. ....
the appearance of dust spots and imperfections actually look WORSE on
the "light" setting than they do with "none". And since the "medium"
setting begins to blur, it basically makes the dust removal almost
unusable.

The curves control feature is implemented a bit differently compared
to most photo editors. The adjustment is applied to linear gamma data
after setting black/whitepoints, but before Gamma adjustment. So don't
expect to use the same settings as one would use in Photoshop. The
Preview/Scan tab will show the effect after all (including gamma and
colorspace) adjustments, so go by that.

The graph seems to serve no particular purpose beyond entertainment,
but time will tell...maybe someone will find a use.

I downloaded 8.3.16 and was not too impressed.

Have others had problems with the IR cleaning? There was a new and
interesting artifact I'd never seen before with my Canon FS4000US which
looked like a bunch of multicolor circles landed on part of my image.
Novel and yet disturbing. Saving the non-cleaned file confirmed this
was an IR artifact. ....
After this I went back to 8.3.01 which works except that it chopps off
5% off of mounted slides if you change the cropping.

Same here with PS CS. It used to be that the 1st image wouldn't open but
subsequent images would. Now none of the scanned images do ....
Maris


I was using version 8.3.24 of Vuescan with the Minolta 5400 and
found an issue with IR cleaning. ....
Since part of the film is scanned twice (the overlap), and the
IR defects only appear the second time, the problem lies with
the software.

I'm using the Linux version of 8.3.26 with the Minolta 5400. I can't
reproduce your streaks, but I find the IR cleaning does not work at all
now.

With the IR clean set to None, the IR channel shows some dust on a grey
background. With the IR Clean set to Medium the dust remains on the RGB
view, but the IR channel shows pure white. The pixel colours display
doesn't show any IR.

Reverting to 8.3.10 with the same slide it all works correctly.

So there is clearly something wrong.

Another problem I found was when the 'number of samples' is set to 4 or
more the scanner skips, and strips of the picture are repeated. Has
anyone else seen that?

John

Same here. Streaks in shades, visible only with IR switched on. ....
Yes, 3.25 and 3.26 do not have streaks but IR cleaning seems to be
(mostly?) gone. ....
In all honesty I am getting tired of this hit and miss game.


....
You can try different version of Vuescan, I believe that 8.3.30
is seriously broken. I have installed it and it broke _everything_.
Had to return to the previous version (8.3.25) which works OK for me.

Andy.
Click to expand...

Second the notion of rolling back to a prior working version of VueScan. I
was OK with 8.3.25 also. Version 8.3.30 stuffed my K-M DSM into an endless
"calibrate" state.
Regards,
Theo
Click to expand...

I'm seeing a similar issue with an HP Scanjet 5500c. Scanner works
with other programs but once VueScan (8.3.30) is run then I have to
reboot the computer to get the scanner recognized again by the other
programs.
Click to expand...


Subject: Re: VueScan stopped working as soon as I paid the $50!!!!
I feel raped. ....
I plunked down $50 to
register the program, assuming all its features would now work. Well,
as soon as I tried to run the program again after registering it, not
only did I find the PREVIEW function not working, but the whole program
stopped working altogether. I can't even get it past the point where ....
The Hamrick website seems to make it too hard for anybody to want to
submit a question or complaint. But they made sure to note that the
$50 is non-refundable.

I am absolutely fed up with things that don't work and companies that
do not take responsibility for their products. This was $50 I could
not afford to waste at this time.

Vuescan version 8.3.32 is indicated as having: "Improved profiling of
IT8 calibration targets"

I've tried the new version, doing scan-from-disk with the same 16bit
linear scan of an IT8 target. My old and new histograms were
*identical*, with all variables/settings unchanged, down to the 1/100
of unit for "Mean" "Std Deviation" and "Mean", Photoshop CS2.

I haven't tried the latest version to compare profiles myself. But I
seem to recall that people had observed some bugs with the
implementation of the profiling. ....
But, perhaps the "improvements"
were more about overcoming some bugs as opposed to improved
quality/accuracy of the profiles. Or alternatively, maybe one of
those bugs is still there and no new profile files(s) were actually
written - so you're really working with your old profiles.

Now, let's see if 8.3.33 fixes the annoying but where the cropping
changes between preview and the scan (gotta love waiting for a 4000dpi
scan and then having a side lopped off).
Click to expand...

--- no end... ---
 
These posts from Bart are more than 2 years old. How do you know they
are still true or haven't been rendered obsolete by changes in Vuescan?

Also, the IR cropping bug appears fixed with recent versions (will
confirm when I get back more film to scan).
 
Okay, thanks everyone for all the input/dialogue. As a result, I've made
progress:

Setting the preview res to low(ish) figure of 860 got things pretty much
back to normal - despite the fact that it had always been set to Auto...
odd, that.

I'm currently on version 8.3.19 of Pro - any (constructive) reason not to go
for the latest update?

For the record, I always scan to a (theoretically) lossless .TIFF then
produce any other format I require in Photoshop; haven't tried ViewScan's
..JPG output lately, but wasn't overly impressed when I did. Don't see too
much wrong with the .TIFFs, though - and I suspect that I'm probably getting
as much out of this scanner as it's capable of producing.

RM
 
These posts from Bart are more than 2 years old. How do you know they
are still true or haven't been rendered obsolete by changes in Vuescan?
Click to expand...

Because Bart would be the first one to shout loudly from the top of
the mountain about such changes. His silence is deafening.

Instead, he overreacts with made-up (i.e. unsubstantiated) personal
attacks every time objective facts about VueScan are mentioned.

Therefore, there's only one reasonable explanation for such
hypersensitivity and touchiness: A huge chip on his shoulder.
Also, the IR cropping bug appears fixed with recent versions (will
confirm when I get back more film to scan).
Click to expand...

The key word there being "appears".

I don't need to tell you about all the wild claims about this or that
VueScan bug "appearing" to have been fixed, only to resurface a
versions or two later, because you yourself have posted messages about
this many times.

Therefore, whether any one single VueScan bug may temporarily be "in
hiding" is beside the point. The key is the long term trend. And (as
my last message clearly illustrates) the long term VueScan trend is a
program which is riddled with recurring bugs.

Does that mean some people may nevertheless use it and enjoy it? Of
course, not! But it does mean that choosing to ignore the many VueScan
bugs doesn't make them disappear. And neither does shooting the
messenger!

Don.
 
VueScab
Click to expand...

Believe it or not but that was a genuine typo! The two letters are
next to each other.

It may have been unintentional but it sure fits! "VueScaB"! Hmmm? Yes,
I like it! ;o)

Similar to "VueScaM" - a duped and furious user called it once when
the author refused to refund him the money!

Can anyone think of any others? Let's see... How about "VueScaR"? ;o)

Don.
 
Setting the preview res to low(ish) figure of 860 got things pretty much
back to normal - despite the fact that it had always been set to Auto...
odd, that.
Click to expand...

Not, really. It's exactly what one would expect from VueScan.
I'm currently on version 8.3.19 of Pro - any (constructive) reason not to go
for the latest update?
Click to expand...

The key question is: Why do you want to upgrade in the first place?

If the current version does what you want, and there are no new
features, upgrading can be counterproductive. Especially in case of a
program like VueScan with its appalling track record regarding bugs.

However, if you are after a specific new feature the common wisdom
when it comes to VueScan is to let others debug it first. It's still
no proof you won't be bitten so make sure you backup the old version!!

It doesn't get any more constructive than that.
Don't see too
much wrong with the .TIFFs, though - and I suspect that I'm probably getting
as much out of this scanner as it's capable of producing.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for your scanner/setup/environment/requirements/etc. but
(in theory) that depends on how closely you look.

Considering that you have VueScan in the loop, odds are the TIFFs are
quite corrupt and it's very doubtful you're getting anywhere near
optimal results, let alone the most out of your scanner.

But since you don't see anything it probably means the output is "good
enough" for your needs. (N.B. For an objective evaluation you need to
examine the underlying data, not just look at the image.)

Don.
 
SNIP
I'm currently on version 8.3.19 of Pro - any (constructive) reason
not to go for the latest update?
Click to expand...

Just check:
<http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/vuescan.htm#changes>
If you see a change that is (or may be) relevant to your workflow
and/or scanner model, go for it.

As a general rule, I rename the existing version by adding the version
number to the folder name, so c:\vuescan\ becomes c:\vuescan8343\ ,
which makes it possible to revert to the older version should the need
arise.

Then run the new installer, which will create a fresh vuescan folder
and relevant files. That way you'll automatically start with a clean
slate and a new vuescan.ini, so there is no risk of conflicts with
newer functionality.
For the record, I always scan to a (theoretically) lossless .TIFF
then produce any other format I require in Photoshop; haven't tried
ViewScan's .JPG output lately, but wasn't overly impressed when I
did.
Click to expand...

VueScan uses the same JPEG library as many other programs, and as such
should produce identical results, assuming that the same chroma
subsampling parameters are used (which is practically the only
potential quality difference). Obviously the compression factor or
quality settings need to be properly applied.
Don't see too much wrong with the .TIFFs, though - and I suspect
that I'm probably getting as much out of this scanner as it's
capable of producing.
Click to expand...

Same here, standard libraries are used. Since TIFFs don't use lossy
compression, they should be of identical image quality compared to
saves from other applications.

Bart
 
Don wrote
(in article said:
Because Bart would be the first one to shout loudly from the top of
the mountain about such changes. His silence is deafening.

Instead, he overreacts with made-up (i.e. unsubstantiated) personal
attacks every time objective facts about VueScan are mentioned.

Therefore, there's only one reasonable explanation for such
hypersensitivity and touchiness: A huge chip on his shoulder.


The key word there being "appears".

I don't need to tell you about all the wild claims about this or that
VueScan bug "appearing" to have been fixed, only to resurface a
versions or two later, because you yourself have posted messages about
this many times.

Therefore, whether any one single VueScan bug may temporarily be "in
hiding" is beside the point. The key is the long term trend. And (as
my last message clearly illustrates) the long term VueScan trend is a
program which is riddled with recurring bugs.

Does that mean some people may nevertheless use it and enjoy it? Of
course, not! But it does mean that choosing to ignore the many VueScan
bugs doesn't make them disappear. And neither does shooting the
messenger!
Click to expand...

Not to pour fuel on the fire here Don, certainly not after you
have been so helpful to me, but if the choice is between VueScan
and the Canon scan software ScanGear and Photostudio, then you
*have* to go with the Vuescan product. The Canon/Arcsoft
package they ship can only be described as complete crap.

If I had to do over again, I would never had purchased a Canon
scanner, but I have it now, and nobody is standing in line to
take it off my hands.
 
I can't speak for your scanner/setup/environment/requirements/etc. but
(in theory) that depends on how closely you look.

Considering that you have VueScan in the loop, odds are the TIFFs are
quite corrupt and it's very doubtful you're getting anywhere near
optimal results, let alone the most out of your scanner.

But since you don't see anything it probably means the output is "good
enough" for your needs. (N.B. For an objective evaluation you need to
examine the underlying data, not just look at the image.)

Don.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're not being even a tad patronising with the tone of the above
comments, so I'll regard them as constructive - on which basis, thanks for
your input.

But no, my needs are in fact quite demanding (I'm a pro photographer), and
as I can't upgrade my hardware just yet, I do need to get the max from what
I have. I'm assuming (maybe wrongly) that the optics were the main limiting
factor with the scanner. But maybe not.

And, having paid for ViewScan Pro, plus Photoshop, I'd kind of hoped I was
reasonably well-equipped. Certainly, the results are WAY better than with
the supplied Canon software. I can live with the ViewScan interface; works
for me, now I'm used to working with it, with plenty of (advanced options)
tweaks available.

That said, what would you suggest for a better-performing package, and why?

Regards,

RM
 
Roger Moss wrote
(in article said:
And, having paid for ViewScan Pro, plus Photoshop, I'd kind of hoped I was
reasonably well-equipped. Certainly, the results are WAY better than with
the supplied Canon software.
Click to expand...

This matches my experience perfectly. The Canon software is a
train wreck. VueScan may not be perfect, but it's orders of
magnitude better than the Canon/Arcsoft package from hell.
I can live with the ViewScan interface; works
for me, now I'm used to working with it, with plenty of (advanced options)
tweaks available.

That said, what would you suggest for a better-performing package, and why?
Click to expand...

Without moving to a Nikon scanner, I think you found it.
 
Not to pour fuel on the fire here Don, certainly not after you
have been so helpful to me, but if the choice is between VueScan
and the Canon scan software ScanGear and Photostudio, then you
*have* to go with the Vuescan product. The Canon/Arcsoft
package they ship can only be described as complete crap.
Click to expand...

Not at all, Randy. I have no problem with people using VueScan be it
because they like it or because they have no choice. It's a common
warped misrepresentation some (the rabid) VueScan "fans" like to
spread.

Indeed, I have often recommended VueScan myself, something the above
mentioned VueScan "fans" regularly choose to ignore because it
contradicts their biases.

No, the problem I have is when people try to negate objective facts
with wishful thinking or, worse, irrationally lash out at those who
merely point out those objective facts.
If I had to do over again, I would never had purchased a Canon
scanner, but I have it now, and nobody is standing in line to
take it off my hands.
Click to expand...

I know the feeling. No matter how careful we are, sooner or later, we
all end up with lemons on our hands. The question then is whether to
take a hit and move on or maybe throw good money after bad. And to
that there is no one answer because it all depends on the context.

BTW, as I write elsewhere, once you have VueScan all set up resist the
urge to upgrade just for upgrade's sake. Wait for others to debug any
new release first. But most of all (!) when you must upgrade (e.g. to
fix a bug) make sure you keep the old version!!! (Just rename the
existing directory, for example.)

I've lost count of gullible VueScan users who rushed to upgrade only
to find out that the "new improved" version is actually far worse than
"the devil you know". And then they scramble to try and find the old
version by posting messages here because the author doesn't keep an
archive. Too embarrassing, I guess.

Don.
 
Back
Top