Re: Yippee!

Don (phoney.email@xxxxxxxxx) wrote in
news:cv02t1hfv5gfuitock07lqb6lt44jjfm9d@xxxxxxx:

>>The thing is, there was a (reddish) color cast *before* applying gain.
>>And it seemed heavier on a second, even darker picture (thinner
>>negative!). I'm not sure where that comes from but it may be that the
>>scanner is not competely compensating for the color of the film base
>>on such "thin" underexposed negatives - it looks like just that color.
>
> Casts are quite complicated because there are so many components
> (characteristic film curve, scanner response, etc), but in a nutshell,
> you can reduce a cast by adjusting individual Analog Gain (AG)
> channels *if* the film response is linear (as I explained last time).
>
> For example, try reducing the red channel AG and see what happens.

That's what I did to start with - it gives me a ballpark approximation,
but I find I have much finer control in PSP with a curves adjustment
layer. I'm already thinking that I'll use analog gain adjustement for
master only - if that.

> Negatives add another complication because they have to be inverted.

Exactly - I'm thinking that on negatives "gain" really is "loss" with
*less* light being used, and thus probably increasing noise. I'll have
to do some controlled tests to check my theory though. ;-) I've already
seen that "gain" on negatives goes the same way as on slides (moving the
master slider to the right makes the preview lighter) - but it *can't*
be the same. And if "gain" on a negative actually means *less* light, I
don't think noise could be reduced - if anything, only increased.

> If you use Auto Exposure then NikonScan has been known to clip a bit.

Hmm...

> There are many ways of tackling this. At one end, you can just turn
> AutoExposure off, and at the other end, scan negatives as Positive and
> then do the inversion manually. In both cases you will also have to
> expand the dynamic range by setting the black and white point because
> negatives (unlike slides) are compressed on film.
>
> If you want to turn AutoExposure (AE) off, do note that Nikon hates it
> when you do that and is very cranky! What you need to do is, turn AE
> off in NikonScan. Close NikonScan. Turn off the scanner!!!!!
> Apparently this setting is saved in the scanner itself!?!?!? Only
> then, is the Auto Exposure truly off. But if you turn it on even for a
> brief moment, you have to repeat the whole procedure again.

I'll watch out for this! I guess when I hit a really bad negative that I
really do want to salvage, I'll just try all possible methods and pick
what's best. Eventually I should (I hope) get enough experience to
estimate what approach is going to work best / fastest for a particular
negative.


>>And once I learn PSP's noise reduction tool, I'm going to test some
>>noise reduction plugins as well. Practice, practice, practice.
>
> The best way of removing noise is to scan twice and then combine. I've
> written many long messages on the subject because that's what I've
> been wrestling with all along. Check the archives (look for "twin
> scan") and then let me know if you need more info.

I don't see myself doing this for *every* negative. I'm already finding
there is always some noise, but on a perfectly-exposed negative it's
very light and PSP's noise reduction takes care of it very well (and a
damn lot faster than doing two scans and combining them). But for the
bad ones, it's worth a try.

>>I'm working on "getting organized" now.
>
> It took me 2 years to do that! ;o) Including writing my own scanner
> program, 16-bit histogram and a twin scan merge program!

Well, I'm "half-organized" now - see my reply to Surfer! But I'm not
about to write my own software (If I really needed to I could - but I
won't).



> I don't know how much [the FH-3] is but I do know it's pricey. It's
> just Nikon trying to squeeze out every penny. :-/ I think it's
> despicable because the film holder is a "must have". As I say they did
> include it with the LS-30 but not with LS-50!?

The salesman at my photography shop said pretty much the same thing...
they can ask what they want: if you need it you need it and there's no
way around it! SoNkon can ask whatever they like for the thingy. The
darned thing cost me almost EUR 48! But I guess if you really only scan
slides, you wouldn't need it.


> I just call them "sleeves" or "negative sleeves".

See my reply to Surfer! for some fancy names I found on packaging. ;-)

> As to a numbering system, there were some messages here about that.
> It's important to figure it all out before you start. And especially
> before you burn anything to DVDs!

Indeed. I'm working out my system (my current film numbering system will
stay - storage of digital files is another matter); I'll start a new
thread about that pretty soon (once I'm "organized" :)).

> I went through a few of those as well and found out that not
> everything calling itself "microfiber" really is microfiber. The best
> microfiber cloth I found was in a camera store in Germany, but someone
> here reported seeing the same make in Irelands as well.

Blower brush and micro fiber cloth both bought at the camera store. They
had two types of micro fiber cloth, and I picked the one that came in
its own sleeve; it was the cheapest as well. I'll see how it behaves...


>>One more for today: what would you do with a cut-through negative? 1/3
>>of the negative on one strip, 2/3 on the next?
>
> When I was sorting out all my films I noticed I had one of those! Of
> course, it was a very important film!!! How can those *idiots* slice a
> film like that is beyond me! I do have the prints (already scanned),
> but I certainly want to scan the negatives. It will just take a lot of
> work to fix them.
>
> I plan to put them in the holder and then scan together. It's going to
> be tricky establishing the exposure because of the light shining
> through the crack. But it's essential to scan both halves together so
> I can repair the damage without worrying about the alignment. I'll
> also probably use the scanned photograph as a template.
>
> There's no way around it, it will just take a lot of work... :-(

While getting organized today (starting to) I found I have not one, but
several. Talk about idjits! I was indeed thinking of putting them in the
film strip holder together (if they'll fit in together!!). Using a
scanned photograph is a good idea - but there isn't one! The first one I
noted isn't really important though, so I'll save those gymnastics for a
rainy day.


Oh, wait, all scanning is done inside! :(


--
Marjolein Katsma
*Help with HomeSite/Studio: http://hshelp.com/
*Travel blog: http://blog.iamback.com/
*Spam reporting addresses: http://banspam.javawoman.com/report3.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scanning vs digital image
    ... what you call "noise" is ... Grain is, of course. ... So is bad film. ... The "perfect" scanner film would have a smooth ...
    (comp.periphs.scanners)
  • Re: Noise: digital or analogue?
    ... the film grain and looks fine to me. ... lot like digital chroma noise, and I suspect that's what you're actually ... scans) by cranking up the scanner to 16x multi-sampling, ...
    (rec.photo.darkroom)
  • best way to xfer super-8 to digital? super-8 film auto-film scanners?
    ... I remember there was some sort of "auto feed" frame by frame scanner ... Super-8 film scanner project I am working on! ... I just got a " CMOS-PRO" digital camera off eBay for $200.00 (lists new ...
    (rec.video)
  • Re: 35mm film scanner questions
    ... my scanner will do 6400dpi which can give me a 160Mg TIFF file ... For a start, the information you are pulling off of the film at that resolution is at a very low contrast - due to the vanishingly small MTF of the film, not to mention the original camera optics. ... Similarly, you gloss over the noise with some glib "anti-noise" filter statement without recognising that no filter can distinguish between signal and noise, so reducing noise also reduces the signal - of which you have already precious little anywhere near the limiting resolution of your scanner. ... It certainly isn't the equivalent of the 53Mp digital camera that your exceedingly naive assessment claims. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Color Management Process
    ... The objective of color management is to develop "profiles" for each ... monitor, printer, projector, etc, will "render" those colors somewhat ... including digital camera, flatbed scanner, and film scanner. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)