Leica and Nikon 5000 ED newbie

[matt_wardle1]

Last month i bought a Leica M6 with the idea if leaving by digital kit at home

and shooting just lovely Leica images. Ive owned a Nikon 5000 ED for about a

year and now is the time to put it to good use, so after shooting many many

rolls of velvia I started scanning. All the images I scan are pin sharp as Ive

spent ages pouring over them on the lightbox. Now im relatively new to scanning,

but I've tried every trick in the book, every blog's technique and read

everything online there is to scanning, yet im just not satisfied, unsharp and

lacking in any real presence. The scanner and Leica are both top gear, and Im a

working Pro and love image making. Does anyone have any real hints that will

help me on my way to getting the best out of the scanner? Im getting a bit

depressed and dont want to pick up my Canon gear!

[matt_wardle1]

Sorry for the Typo's!

[ellis_vener_photography]

Are the scans not "sharp" or not focused? There is a difference.

[jtk]

If Nikon scans aren't "sharp," it's likely that your film isn't as sharp as you thought it was.

 

Abandon *all* blogs and alleged expert advice, just use Nikon's most basic instructions.

[radfordneal]

Yes, we need an image to see what the problem is. It should be one that was scanned with no options set (no ICE, no GEM, etc.), except auto focus and auto exposure. It should be of a shot at f/5.6 to f/11 with a

good lens, where you're sure the focus is right, and for good measure, the subject has some depth variation so that if the focus isn't right some part will still be sharp. I'd suggest that it be with flash, so that camera and subject motion won't be an issue, or failing that

at a high shutter spead and/or with a tripod.

[claudio_coltro_coltro]

Matt,

 

Your questioning it is not completely clear to me either. It might be that you share my disapointment when comparing what I see as the output of the scanner on a screen and the same slide projected or on the lightbox with a good loupe.

The visual impact of a slide cannot be matched by either prints or screens.

 

Regards

 

Claudio

 

www.claudiocoltro.com

[Stock-Photos]

I agree with the other responders. To assume a piece of film is "pin sharp" because you look at it on a light box , is just that, assuming.

 

Instead of pixel peeping, make some prints.

 

Before scanning the film, manually set the auto-focus points to the area of the subject you want sharpest.

 

It's not realistic to expect slide scans to look as good as projected slides.

 

I've published a page of slide scanning tips, but it's not quite complete:

 

http://www.slidescanning123.com/tips/

[mendel_leisk]

Regardless of the camera's focus, the sharpness of the film grain in the scan is a good indicator of how you're doing. And a bit of sharpening is usually beneficial.

[jim_hargan]

Hi Matt!

 

I've used a Nikon 4000 for many years. I have produced scans from 35mm Velvia that have been used for book covers and textbook chapter openers. It has the same focusing system as your 5000, and I can make a pretty good guess as to your problem.

 

Basically, the auto focus is worthless. (And don't waste any money on the auto slide feeder while you're at it.) Auto-focus produces an average of the center of the image. On a mounted slide, this is very near the high point, and the film will curve significantly within the mount. (By repute, Quickpoint mounts have the least curving, and Paxon the most.)

 

To focus accurately, you need to find the high point and the low point, and then set the focus between them. The high point is seldom at the center; it is usually some distance off, both right/left and up/down. The low point is nearly always at the opposite corner of the high point -- but can be at the long edge opposite the high point, in the middle.

 

You find the high and low points by clicking on the magnifying glass icon, then clicking on the preview image. This will give you an arbitrary number under Scanner Extras/Focus (from memory). Here's what you need to know: your scanner's depth of field on this arbitrary scale is always 16. That is, you got plus/minus 8 from this focus number as your depth of field. Anything outside this range is out of focus. I have been known to scan a slide twice at different focus settings and merge the two in Photoshop.

 

Beyond that, the Nikon 4000 produces a slightly soft focus at 4000 dpi, which I attribute to a poor match between the lens and the CCD. As both were upgraded (according to Nikon) for the 5000, perhaps this is now better.

 

I recommend against applying any unsharp mask, in the scanner or in PS. Unsharp mask removes information. Scan at 4000 dpi and 16 bit, and apply lossless processing in Photoshop. Then copy this primary image, and apply lossy changes (sharpening, etc) to the copy when you need to print it, publish it, or deliver it.

[jim_hargan]

Sorry, Les. I am new to this forum and was scanning top down. Perhaps the OP was doing this, too!

 

Yes, it is likely that the OP introduced a bit of softness by hand-holding or using a flimsy tripod. Such softness might not be visible on a light table, but would be glaring in a 4000 dpi scan. The depth of focus problem shows as uneven sharpness, rather than the overall softness that the OP seems to be getting.

[scott_brim]

One of the most important lessons I learned four years ago after purchasing my 5000 ED is that although the lens has good depth of field, you cannot get optimum sharpness unless you spend the time needed to map the curvature of the film using the techniques Jim describes.

 

I am about to self-publish an 11 x 13 color photo book through www.Blurb.com using scans made with the Nikon for most of the material.

 

I could not afford an Imacon for the scanning step, and so had to substitute lots of digital elbow grease using the Nikon in combination with Photoshop.

 

Anyway, I could not be more pleased with the final results. Blurb does a great job with their large format books, and the Nikon did much more than could or should be asked of a desktop scanner.