Re: [OM] OT--Nikon 2000 slide scanner vs Minolta Multi?

[Jan Steinman]

>From: Richard Schaetzl <Richard.Schaetzl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

>Jan Steinman wrote:
>
>> The Nikon software also has some serious problems for serious users. ...
>
>> So I scan everything in 48 bits and tweak in in photoshop, since the Nikon
>> software is useless... 
>
>> My impression is that they spent too much time on the GUI, and not enough
>> time thinking about workflow ...
>
>Have you tried Silverfast scanner software? 
>Here in Europe, it comes bundeled (in an limited version?) with the
>Nikon scanner (additional to the Nikon soft).

I'd love to use it, but it's too damn expensive. They used to have a fully-functional demo version that watermarked the output, but the rumor on ScanDigest <http://www.leben.com/lists> is they no longer distribute it, because a few technically sophisticated people had figured out how to remove the watermark.

There is so much truly awful software out there, and I refuse to send a company nearly a third of the cost of a scanner for software that I can't try out first, nor return if I'm dissatisfied.

<flame>How much better would products be if companies didn't put so much effort into crippling them? Microsoft Office is perhaps the most pirated software available, and it doesn't seem to be sending Microsoft to the poor house. I make my living from intellectual property, and don't feel threatened by piracy. Why should I trust any company that doesn't trust me?</flame>

Would anyone in Europe who is happy with NikonScan want to part with a legal copy of SilverFast for a resonable fee?


: Jan Steinman <mailto:jans@xxxxxxxxxxx>
: 19280 Rydman Court, West Linn, OR 97068-1331 USA
: +1.503.635.3229