|
Nikon Coolscan III (LS-30) Film Scanner Test
Images
As we note in our review of the Coolscan III, it is in many
respects an exact duplicate of the higher-priced Super Coolscan
2000. About the only difference you're likely to see in the images
from it vs those from the Super CoolScan will be in the "Train"
image, where the Super Coolscan does a better job of extracting
shadow detail. More subtly, we did notice slightly greater
color saturation in some strong primaries with the Super Coolscan,
most noticeable in the red flowers in the model's hair in the
"Musicians II" test image. Overall though, the performance
is remarkably good, at a more affordable price than that of the
Super Coolscan.
A word about our scanner testing philosophy: Some publications
have taken the position of scanning everything using the scanner's
default settings, believing this to be most fair, neutral methodology.
The problem with this approach is it may show unacceptable results
for an otherwise perfectly usable scanner. (Most users are willing
to engage in some tweaking of the scanning parameters to get
the best result.) For our part, we believe the most accurate
representation of real-world performance is to allow for a reasonable
level of twiddling of the scan parameters. In the interest of
objectivity though, we also show scans performed with default
settings, to provide a completely neutral reference point.
Also note that all images here have been JPEG compressed for
compatibility with 'web browsers. This will degrade image quality
somewhat, but we used a very conservative compression setting
("9" in Photoshop) to minimize this. (In earlier tests,
we used a setting of "8", but have gone to the higher
setting (and larger file sizes) to provide a better rendition
of shadow detail at the cost of longer download times.) |
|
|
"Musicians II" image:
(530k) The main image here was scanned
at 1200 x 788 pixels, and (very) minor tonal adjustments were
made, using the "curves-levels" controls to increase
the gamma setting (very) slightly, lightening the midtones. What
was particularly surprising about this shot with the CoolScan
III was how well the scanner did with its default settings -
even noticeably better than its big brother the LS-2000. Here
is a version scanned with the LS-30's default
settings (525k), almost identical
to our adjusted version.
(NOTE that this is NOT the identical
"Musicians" image as used in our digital cameras test!
It's very similar, but the models are different, and the digital-camera
version is a couple of reproduction generations removed from
this particular version.)
|
|
|
|
"Musicians II"
detail clip: (767k) The LS-30's
2700 dpi maximum resolution is at the upper end of available
desktop film scanners, and much more than this would have little
purpose on most 35mm film. This maximum-resolution clip of the
Musicians II image shows the exceptional detail and near-total
lack of artifacts the LS-30 produces. Note how easily you can
see individual strands of hair, and the complete lack of pixelation.
This description will be familiar to those of you also looking
at the LS-2000: It's the same! The two scanners turned in an
almost identical performance on this image. The only differences
we could see were a slightly greater level of color saturation,
and slightly better handling of shadows in the hair by the LS-2000.
This shows that, for well-exposed slides and negatives, the LS-30
will perform almost exactly as well as the LS-2000. |
|
|
|
Kodak Royal Gold
25 "House" detail clip: @!#$!! To our chagrin,
we discovered that a hard drive crash wiped out our only copy
of this scan, AFTER we'd returned the test unit to Nikon! (I
know: back it up, back it up, back it up!) Accordingly, we have
no sample to show you from the LS-30 for this picture. We do
recall its performance as being very similar to that of the LS-2000
though (including the excellent job the Digital ICE technology
did of cleaning-up the tiny white specks evident in this image
with most scanners). We provide here a copy of the LS-2000's
sample of this image, and refer you to the LS-2000's Pictures
Page for a detailed discussion and samples of how well Digital
ICE coped with the film defects. |
|
|
|
"Train" Shot
(Extreme shadow detail): (373k) This
slide is an extraordinarily tough test of scanner dynamic range:
The slide contains areas of moderately bright highlight, but
the shadows are exceptionally dense. The LS-30 did surprisingly
well on this image for a 10-bit scanner, but achieving this result
required judicious use of the "Analog Gain" function
that boosts the LED illumination level. Even with that, it didn't
do as well as the 12-bit LS-2000, which also has a multi-sample
scanning option to further reduce shadow noise. As you'd expect,
the default scan settings produced a rather dark
image (315k). After a fair bit of
tweaking, we obtained the main image here
(373k), which shows pretty good detail,
albeit with moderate noise in the very darkest areas. For comparison,
here's the same image from the
LS-2000 (173k - compressed more than LS30
sample), which did the best job on this image of any scanner
we've tested to date. |
|
|
|
Q60
Color Target: (110k) Kodak's "Q60"
color target (formally adopted by the ISO as part of the IT8
color standard) is a good test of color accuracy and tonal rendition.
the main image here (110k)
was scanned with the scanner's "gamma" control set
to 1.2, and the white-point slider brought in by about 18 units.
(The same settings as we used with the LS-2000.) This brightened
the midtones a bit, and gave a better rendition of the slide
overall, at least to our eyes. While the default
scan (96k) did an excellent job of
capturing the full tonal range of the subject, with superior
color saturation to boot, it is a little dark overall. The pure
white swatch on the grayscale at the bottom of the target is
very light relative to the rest of the image. This tends to "fool"
scanners' autoexposure settings, producing artificially dark
scans, as did the LS-30. Interestingly, the LS-30 again performed
slightly different than it's big brother the LS-2000 on this
scan. Both the default and adjusted scans were a bit darker overall,
although the difference was slight. (Other than the issue of
shadow detail, the two units do indeed appear to behave much
the same.) |
|
|
|
"Davebox"
test target: (335k) This is our
official "weirdness of color negative film" test target.
The default scan (266k)
by the CoolScan III shows excellent tonal range, and good color,
although it has a rather warm cast overall. We actually "tweaked"
with this one a fair bit, to properly balance the color, and
eliminate the color cast from the shadows as well as the highlights.
(The color shift varied across the tonal range.) The final
result (335k) has excellent color
purity and saturation, and a good tonal range, although we lost
some of the deepest shadows in the course of our playing around.
(The default scan actually had excellent detail in both the shadows
and highlights.) |
|
|
|
WG-18
Resolution Target Horizontal Clip: (50k)
The full WG-18 resolution target is very large (see below),
so we cropped-out these clips to show the scanner resolution
on this familiar target. These scans were made from a target
shot on Kodak Technical Pan black & white negative film.
This film is extremely fine-grained, with perhaps the highest
resolution of any commercially-available 35mm emulsion. The target
was shot with a Nikon 50mm, f1.4 lens (a notably sharp lens),
at an aperture of f8. Thus, while not a "laboratory"
grade target, this represents about as much detail as you'll
ever see in a conventional film image. The downside of this target
is that the Tech Pan emulsion is a little "thin," lacking
density. It is thus difficult to set scanners properly to produce
adequate contrast to separate the finest details without losing
critical information. As a result, the scans shown here were
captured with significant adjustments to the tone controls. These
scans were also done in black & white mode, to reveal the
maximum detail This clip (50k)
of the horizontally-oriented test pattern (measuring vertical
resolution) shows detail visible out to 1600 line pairs/picture
height, although there's some aliasing evident back as far as
1200 lp/ph. (As you'd expect, given that there's about 2500 pixels
in the image vertically, and sampling theory would predict aliasing
at around 1250 lp/ph.) |
|
|
|
WG-18
Resolution Target Vertical Clip: (47k)
Here's the corresponding vertically-oriented
clip (47k) of the WG-18/Kodak Tech
Pan target. Visual resolution is almost identical to the horizontal
clip, with detail visible to 1600 lp/ph or beyond, although the
aliasing here doesn't seem to start in earnest until about 1300
lp/ph. |
|
|
NOTE! ->
|
Full-Size
WG-18 Resolution Target: (1,367k!) For
the real masochists, here's the full-size WG-18 target, scanned
at the maximum resolution of 2700 dpi. A side note: We didn't
explicitly set up a test for frame coverage by scanners, but
our WG-18 shot goes right to the edges of the 35mm frame, and
we found that the LS-30 covers all that and then some. For this
particular scan, we were using the separate strip-film holder
in the slide scanning head, which crops about 2-3% of the available
35mm frame area.
WARNING: This JPEG expands into a 9.1 megabyte file,
which may crash your brower if viewed directly! To view it, you
must first download it directly to your hard drive (right-click
in Windows, click & hold in Mac Netscape), then open it in
an image-editing application. Here is a link to the RAW JPEG IMAGE. (No surrounding HTML file. |
|
|
|
USAF
1951 Resolution Target: (333k) (Elderly
technoids only ;-) Old-line lens and film testers will be well-familiar
with the "USAF 1951" resolution test target. (1951
is the year it was created, giving you an idea of what we mean
when we say "old-line".) This was scanned at the maximum
2700 dpi from a laboratory-grade target (chrome on glass slide)
before being cropped down, and would normally give an excellent
view of the scanner's ultimate capabilities. The last distinguishable
feature being group 5, element 3 vertically, at 40.3 line cycles/mm
(1024 line pairs/inch); and group 5, element 5 horizontally,
at 50.8 line cycles/mm (1290 line pairs/inch). The short extent
of the USAF pattern targets doesn't permit the sort of visual
interpolation our eyes do naturally on the more extended WG-18
pattern. As a result, the USAF target should yield much more
conservative resolution numbers. As was also the case on the
LS-2000, this target again produced a minor misalignment between
the red and blue/green channels, resulting in the slight cyan
tint to the upper edges of the finest elements, and the slight
red tint to the lower edges. Because we didn't see any such effect
on any other targets we scanned, we believe it was caused on
this target by the thick glass the pattern is printed on. (Our
thinking is that the additional diffraction introduced by the
glass in the optical path, slightly separated the red, green,
and blue light paths.) |
|
Back to LS-30 Scanner Review
Or, Return to the Imaging
Resource Scanners page.
Or, Return to the Imaging
Resource home page.
|