Some shots from a Olympus Stylus

<p>These shots were taken with a Olympus Stylus, the predecessor of the much-loved Stylus Epic.<br>

The Stylus is slightly larger than the Epic. It has more of a grip on the left side though which makes it easy to hold with both hands. Also the command buttons are on top and are easier to use.</p>

<p>The lens is just as good as the one in the Epic but only f3.5.</p>

<div></div>

<p>American river</p><div></div>

<p>bike trail</p>

<p>try again</p><div></div>

<p>3</p><div></div>

<p>4</p><div></div>

<p>5</p><div></div>

<p>6</p><div></div>

<p>Film was Ektar 100 iirc. Sorry about not cleaning up some of the dust on the negs</p>

<p>Darin - Nice pix. It was indeed a great little camera. I owned tiny Olympus cameras from the original XA to the Stylus Epic and loved them.</p>

<p>However, I have to tell you that dust is not the problem with the images you posted. Except for the very 1st image (ie, the one of the 3 cameras, taken with a Canon PowerShot Pro), you may not realize that all of these pix have a very significant magenta cast. For example, the clouds at the bottom of your last frame all have hues in the range 265-280 degrees, and saturation ranging from about 12 into the low 20s, measured using the eyedropper tool in PS CS5.</p>

<p>HTH,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

 

<p>I have both the Olympus Stylus and the Olympus Mju II (Stylus Epic). Both were purchased (on different days) from Goodwill. I got the original Stylus for $2.99 and it needed a battery. I got the MJU II with a battery and a partially shot roll of film inside for $6.99. I added a wrist strap to the MJU II and shot a new roll and it came out perfectly. Amazing cameras, the MJU II has a lens that is as good as the Yashica T4 that I had many years ago. Too bad I rarely shoot film anymore these days, and when I do, it's usually with my Nikon SLR.</p>

<p>Interesting, and interesting to compare these to your Pentax shots over on Classic Manual.</p>

<p>Congrats. I've been amazed over the last several years to discover how fine many of the older 35mm RF and viewfinder cameras were, and am now with you in discovering that quality did not stop with the "classics".</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yes I beleive you are right about the magenta cast. It could have been from the scanning. What is the best way to remove this?</p>

<p>The one been I have with may of the modern compact cameras is the inability to stop down the lens to get good foreground/background shots. Oftentimes the cameras do not focus on the right spot. this is true with the Epic and T4 as well. it would be nice if they had a 'landscape mode' that would use a 1/30th shutter and focus on the hyperfocal depending on the aperture required.</p>

 

<p>Hi Darin - Looking at the separate histograms for each channel, I think it's a very safe bet to say that the scan parameters (particularly, the endpoints of the level adjustments) were not set properly. Obviously, the best way to fix this is in the scan, not afterwards, but if you want to have a go at it, just using the color balance eyedropper in ACR will get you 90% of the way to good color. The attached tweak of one of your images started with that approach, and then I did a few more tweaks in PS.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>PS - By any chance, might these shots have been taken on old, expired film or were they scans of processed film that has sat around for years? Sometimes one sees color casts like this because of the age of the film.</p><div></div>

<p>Wow, that looks 100% better!<br>

I will double-check the film. I don't remember offhand what it was. it may have even been some expired ektachrome. But I use fresh Ektar alot as well. (it was processed and scanned over a month ago, thats why im a bit fuzzy)</p>

<p>the magenta cast is likely to be the result of the scanning. i get that too when i shoot colour negs</p>

<p>Alvin, Darin - If you use your scanner software on "auto", this certainly can happen. However, with a bit of experience, if you manually adjust the six end "Levels" sliders (ie, two per color channel), you rarely run into this problem. After you get the 6 end points nailed, adjust the remaining three "gamma" (ie, center) sliders (ie, one per channel), and you'll have a fine looking scan with no lost data. Obviously, you should output the result as a 16 bpc TIF instead of an 8 bpc JPG to allow you a bit more flexibility should you need to tweak things after the scan.</p>

<p>If you are scanning lots of material and don't want to be manually adjusting these sliders for each scan, some scanning software (eg, Silverfast) allows one to adjust the automatic clipping percent, which is similar to adjusting the end "Levels" sliders. Set this number very low, say, 0.1% of the pixels, and while you will have some color casts, at least you'll have reasonable data to work with post-scan and won't run into the problem that Darin did, in which, as I recall, one or two of the channels were significantly clipped.</p>

<p>HTH,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>thanks tom for the tip!</p>