Photomatix Pro & scanned images from film

<p>I shot 6x7 Velvia film. I'm keen to get into HDR image retouching using <em >Photomatix Pro 3.1.3</em> ... Do you know if i can use <em >Photomatix Pro </em> using images scanned from film. Has any one had experience with using film rather than images straight from your camera.<br>

Many thanks in advance for you help..... :) S</p>

<p>Hi Steve, I did some experiments with Photomatix and scanned film. Of course you cannot get a true 32 bit HDR image, since this is possible only with RAW files, but you can take full advantage of the Photomatix blending exposure features, which allow you to get more natural results, simulating the dinamic range that you could get with GND filters...<br>

You need to take multiple exposures of the same scene from your camera, mounted on a tripod, then, after scanning them, I suggest you to align the shots manually in Photoshop, before processing them with Photomatix, since this is the most time consuming and critical step to get good results. You will need a lot of RAM memory to blend scanned frames with Photomatix...<br>

Depending on the scene you are photographing, you will need 2 or 3 exposures to cover the entire dinamic range (it dipends of course to the latitude of your film)... I don't suggest you to get the 2 or 3 exposures by scanning the same frame with different exposures settings.<br>

In my portifolio I have some examples of photo obtained with this technique: <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8312751&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8312751&size=lg</a>, <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8448774&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8448774&size=lg</a>, <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/8483651&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/8483651&size=lg</a>. When you shot at moving objects the difficulties increase since Photomatix will create artifacts around them and you need to correct them manually, as I did in the shots I linked before with the cars lights and reflections.<br>

Regards, Alberto.</p>

<p>Many thanks Alberto.<br>

Your work is stunning! Well done. Do you have any web links, which you have found on the web, on HDR Techniques? Especially techniques which related to photographers who use film. I think film may have some unique differences in set-up & preparation when scanning, from those images captured in camera and i would be interested to lean as much as i can.<br>

 

<br />

Many thanks.... :) S

</p>

<p>Steve</p>

<p>perhaps you may like to try using negative rather than slide? If you expose a little higher you may find that scans of negative look rather similar to HDR images handled gracefully. Expose for the shadows and let the hilights be where they will.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you Steve. You can find more info here:<br>

<a href="http://handbook.outbackphoto.com/section_hdr_and_tonemapping/index.html">http://handbook.outbackphoto.com/section_hdr_and_tonemapping/index.html</a><br>

<a href="http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/index.html">http://www.hdrsoft.com/resources/index.html</a><br>

<a href="http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm">http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm</a><br>

<a href="http://www.imagingluminary.com/">http://www.imagingluminary.com/</a><br>

But "try and error" is the best practice! No special techniques required during capturing in camera: just meter and expose right! I scan with Nikon SCS 5000 ED and with Nikon's software (I've tried Vuescan, too, but it's more complicated and I finally got comparable results....) leaving only digital ice on (normal setting) and everything else off: I take care only clipping by looking at the histogram and eventually play with Analog Gain. I scan at 4000 dpi, 16 bit tiff file, AdobeRGB color space, 8 pass multi sampling. Then I do all the editing step in Photoshop 16 bit.<br>

Here you can find a priceless source of information:<br>

<a href="http://www.zuberphotographics.com/content/general/site-index-main.htm">http://www.zuberphotographics.com/content/general/site-index-main.htm</a><br>

Alberto.</p>

<p>I have a student who just recently tried this with some negative film.</p>

<p>Altho, it wasn't quite the same it still worked. The film was scanned at a local "one hour " place and they weren't the best, but he was just having some fun.</p>

<p>I used a Nikon V ED to scan an old kodachrome slide that has never scanned properly due to high contrast. Did a 3 sequence scan inNikonScan 4.02 varying the analog gain from -.3 to 1.6. Combined them in Phototix Pro 3 and the end result was pretty much what the slide looked like. Tried the same thindg in CS4 and got pretty much the same results</p><div></div>

<p>From Alberto via email re his images at top....<br>

<br />"Hi Steve, those images were exposure blended with Photomatix (you can do it manually in Photoshop, but it's more time consuming). Exposure blending mimics the use of GND filters on camera and gives you the most natural results, if this is your goal... With HDR and tone mapping it's very difficult to achieve "realistic" images (besides you cannot use real 32 bit HDR and tonemapping if you start from scanned film). All the best, Alberto. "</p>

<p>Here is an image from a point and shoot disposable camera. I scanned it 3 times and used the highlights and shadows tool in Photomatix. The ISO 800 neg film has captured the range of tones pretty well, although my scans were done in a bit of a hurry so I might have clipped the snow a bit.</p><div></div>

<p>Um... there's no point in scanning color negative film multiple times to pull out dynamic range. Try one proper scan and turn off white and black clipping.</p>

<p>Roger.<br>

Does a good 12 or 16 bit scan contain all the dynamic range held on a negative? If so, then multiple passes are probably not worth it. There is probably more to be gained from slides, but I haven't spent enough time testing out the options. My gut feeling is that neg film is a sort of HDR in its own right.</p>

<p>"Does a good 12 or 16 bit scan contain all the dynamic range held on a negative"<br>

Yes, easily.</p>

<p>It's important to distinguish between the range captured by a medium and the range of the medium itself. Color negative film can express a large dynamic range but does so by compressing it into a color negative which actually has a low range itself- look at a negative. It goes from dark orange to orange. That's the whole range- not much at all. Look at raw scan histograms of negative film and you'll see this.</p>

<p>Slide film can express less range but maps this onto a medium which is relatively contrasty. Look at a slide which has deep blacks to bright highlights. This can exceed the dynamic range of a scanner.</p>

<p>Thanks Roger. That confirms my suspicions.</p>