Dirk, I had been waiting to see if Minolta came out with an improved MultiPro, but finally caved in and bought the current model. I have been scanning my old 6x7, 6x8 and 6x9 negs and am extremely happy with the results (even though I'm only doing 1200 DPI currently). The GEM grain reduction does wonders although it extends scanning times considerably. ICE works very well too.
I bought the minolta and I am right now trying to get it to expose correctly. I am definately not impressed with the auto setting for exposure etc, as I am having a difficult time getting the exposure to match my slide. I guess I will only know after taking them to get processed as my monitor may be the problem.
If anyone has any suggestions for scanning, I would appreciate them greatly.
Have you calibrated your monitor?? I would recommend this as the first step if you are trying to match scans and slides on screen. You are wasting your time otherwise.
Take a look at ColorVision's Spyder or Monaco EZ-Color solutions - not too expensive but work very well.
Regarding the scan workflow, I use a Minolta Scan Multi II so it's maybe a bit different, but I configure the scan software to always set focus for each scan, use auto exposure and then I check the histogram to make sure that I have a full scan of highlights and shadow detail. I may tweak this as necessary. One things that makes a huge difference is to ensure that you set the scan area accurately and avoid including out of slide areas as these will change the auto exposure.
I'm not much help to the question other than I just saw that Vuescan is trialing a profile for the 5400 (look under google/groups under 5400 in the last couple of days). As one who scan slides as well, I can testify to the issue of getting a monitor matched well. If you don't have a color profile SW capability but do have Photoshop, go through the Adobe Gamma routine CAREFULLY and its not that bad. Stay away from making any significant color corrections under the Minolta Application, these should be done under Photoshop.
> [I have had the minolta for a couple of days. A test with a badly underexposed image has been made useable and I have had no problems with exposure. My monitor is calibrated using PhotoShop 5.5 and it simply is a must do thing. First impressions are favourable with the scanner.I previously had the Nikon 111 and the minolta is a great improvement for the same money that I paid three years ago for the Nikon .]
Do any of you that own this scanner that also own vuescan recommend it? I have tried the test version from the google group and it seemed to do a better job, but I cant see the full functionality of the program and what else comes with the full version to know if it is worth the 80 bucks.
I have a Canoscan 4000 and purchased Vuecan (the Pro edition). IT IS DEFINITELY WORTH IT. It gives you upgrades for life and has many, many features that I'm still learning. The biggest Pro for me was that the Canon App (it was a PS plug-in) was very slow and limiting. The Vuescan SW gives better color (you can enter your own ICC profile for the scanner with the correct target), is faster and in general has a better workflow for me. Most people who are serious about getting the most out of their scanner use it. It has a devoted following. The only downside is that Ed Hamrick releases new versions quite frequently and I think that regression issue are just part of the game. He is very fast however at fixiing issues. As I said, the color is true and thats what I care about most.
I give it two thumbs up. It'll just be a matter of a few weeks (I bet) before the 5400 is fully supported.