My first real Nikon V ED flaring problem

[jammer_jammer]

Attached is a sized down gif animation of my first flare problem with my new

Nikon V ED scanner and then the subsequent quicky fix with PS Elements.<p>

 

I've scanned 80 some slides thus far. I've seen this issue raise it's ugly

head a total of 3 times but in the first two instances, I was experimenting

with using the "Positive" setting on the scanner even though the slides were

Kodachrome 64. When I would switch it back to the Kodachrome setting, the

flare would go away completely. This is the first instance where I got the

flare even on the Kodachrome setting. It's completely obvious on the little

girl's right arm but what really weird is there is actually some flare on the

left arm also, where the contrast is much less.<p>

 

Since it happens so infrequently and I'm able to do a half decent fix with

Elements, I don't think I will be sending the scanner back. I'm not really

sure what else I would buy anyway. I don't want to spend any more and I don't

want to buy Minolta since they are defunked as this point. I did want people

to know that this is a real issue on occasion though. :-(

[jtk]

Nice shot.

 

The original version of the scan (with flare) appears to have too little saturation and contrast in the face...it doesn't look like what I'd expect from properly exposed chrome.

 

I wonder if the problem began in the film (perhaps use of a filter?) rather than the scanner. I doubt you could see it with a high powered loupe. Try 4X, not 8X.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

If you're using the same settings to scan all 80 slides without

checking endpoints for each scene as a kind of one size fits all

automated process, you're bound to run into flare up

inconsistancies due to varying exposures at the time the shots

were taken by the camera. Not sure of your workflow or setup.

Just a guess.

 

Do you have a locked down max endpoint setting to be applied to

all 80 slides that doesn't allow blown highlites or absolute

blacks, so you have something to work with in PS?

 

I have yet to see any consumer scanner where you can get

perfect shots without any editing. That flare looks like too much

light by the scanner or sensor gain due to not controlling highlite

blowouts within the software.

[jammer_jammer]

John,<br>

"it doesn't look like what I'd expect from properly exposed chrome."<p>

Yeah, unfortunately, I'm finding out that the vast majority of my slides are not "properly exposed", well, at least not for scanning anyway. They look fine projected but I had routinely underexposed for saturation and almost all of my scans are originally scanning WAY to dark. I've got to really work every scan. As far as there being any flare in the slide itself, I couldn't say as I don't have a lope or a light box as of yet. Thanks John.<p>

 

Tim,<br>

Because I really need to work almost every slide, my original preview is always with no adjustments whatsoever so that I know what I'm dealing with. I work each slide individually. As far as my work flow, well, I've tried all kinds of things. I push buttons and sliders and make settings until things look better. LOL. The most recent work flow pattern that has started forming is to look at the raw preview in order to decide how much analog gain will be needed. I fiddle with the gain a few times until I've brought out as much as possible without blowing highlights too badly. Then I usually go to curves and use that whitepoint dropper icon thingy to set a white point, which I found out, by experimenting, seems to be the easiest, fastest way to get the colors where they look the most natural to me. That's usually the point where I scan. Any further fine adjustments I make in elements. I have no idea if this is even close to a logical work flow. It's just sort of what I have come up with after 80 scans.<p>

 

"Do you have a locked down max endpoint setting to be applied to all 80 slides that doesn't allow blown highlights or absolute blacks, so you have something to work with in PS?"<p>

 

I have nothing locked down at this point and don't completely understand what you are saying. Could you please explain exactly what you're saying and how I would go about doing this?<p>

 

"I have yet to see any consumer scanner where you can get perfect shots without any editing. That flare looks like too much light by the scanner or sensor gain due to not controlling highlight blowouts within the software."<p>

 

You could be on to something because I do end up having to use some degree of analog gain on almost every shot. Should I "control the highlight blowouts BEFORE using the analog gain? If so, could you please explain exactly how to go about this. <p>

 

To both of you, I guess what would be really helpful to me would be for you both to go into what your typical workflow is, including any permanent settings you may use. Then I could experiment with your workflows and ask questions about any of the steps in your workflow that I do not fully understand.<p>

 

THANKS GUYS!

[roger_smith4]

"Do you have a locked down max endpoint setting to be applied to all 80 slides that doesn't allow blown highlights or absolute blacks, so you have something to work with in PS?"

 

I have nothing locked down at this point and don't completely understand what you are saying. Could you please explain exactly what you're saying and how I would go about doing this?

----------------

 

I think he's just asking if you are varying the exposure to suit the slide (not clipping the highlights or blocking up the shadows on some slides) and the answer seems to be "yes." You can check this on the histogram- with slides, try to expose as far to the right as you can without blowing out highlights or introducing flare.

[Tim_Lookingbill]

I'm not familiar with Nikon scanner software so I don't know of

anyway of locking endpoints to be applied to each frame.

 

I have Epson Scan to scan negatives. Negatives are a real pain

for me as it is for others from what I've read on numerous posts

on the subject. The reason I believe is mainly from having to rely

on memory as to how the image should look.

 

Also establishing a realistic depiction of outdoor color temp has

been a real challenge for me so I really haven't been able to

develop a viable and fast workflow. I certainly haven't been able

to scan 80 frames like you, so I was hoping you could teach me

a thing or two.

 

But what I've come up with is once I get one frame looking

correct, I can save the setting and apply it to other frames on the

same strip, but it's a little like starting over because one color

temp correction for one scene doesn't look right for another

taken later in the day or under a shade. So there's never an

automated process to my workflow where I can just crank it out

like my local one hour minilab. But they don't give me a realistic

or accurate results either.

 

That's what I meant by locking down established tolerable

brightness levels by first setting your spectral highlites=(255

RGB) which should only be applied to sun shining on water or

shiny surfaces, not on people's arms and clothing.

 

The thing is once 255RGB as been established in spectrals it's

quite easy to keep brightening past this point with further

curve/levels edits thus causing flare ups from blasting light on

the sensors.

 

I can intentionally cause flare ups on my negatives by adjusting

the Epson Scan levels highlite slider farther to the left after

already establishing spectral highlites. Here's a screen capture

to show what I'm talking about.

[roger_smith4]

"But what I've come up with is once I get one frame looking correct, I can save the setting and apply it to other frames on the same strip, but it's a little like starting over because one color temp correction for one scene doesn't look right for another taken later in the day or under a shade. So there's never an automated process to my workflow where I can just crank it out like my local one hour minilab. But they don't give me a realistic or accurate results either."

 

Negatives are quite distinct from Jammer Jammer's slides in this respect. I'd suggest you make your default settings for mid-day sun (essentially neutral for daylight color films) and then your other shots with deviate from it in a predictable way (cloudy shots will look cooler, fluorescent greener, etc).

 

Consider a QP card (white, black, gray) to help you with this- it's cheaper than most alternatives.

[alex_fan1]

Looks like it need cleaning

 

http://www.pearsonimaging.com/articles/howto/ls5000cleaning.html

[roger_smith4]

Doubt it needed cleaning- it's a brand new scanner.

[jammer_jammer]

Thanks everybody. I appreciate the help. : -)

[stan_belyaev]

I had the same problem with nikon 5000. The only solution I was able to find was to sell Nikon and to buy Minolta Multi Pro.

[stan_belyaev]

It is a known problem. Cleaning will not help.

[robert_k1]

Jammer, IMHO your PS fix is acceptable in this image, to a degree. The top part of the image has a background without any details and the fix is fine. But fixing the bottom part loses all the details (which may not be important in this case). In many other images with critical details in the background, I would find such a fix unacceptable. This drove me crazy on my old scanner. After purchasing a Minolta 5400, I have not seen flares since. Here are some threads and links on this topic:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001A4q

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004EWS

 

http://www.vad1.com/photo/dirty-scanner/

 

http://www.pearsonimaging.com/ls5000cleaning.html

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00A2Sh

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CTcF