Scanning Slide Film Results in "Fuzzy" Images

[lisa_taute1]

I'm using a Microtek ArtixScan 4000tf film scanner to scan some 35mm slides I

took some time back. I'd like to have digital scans for processing in

Photoshop. However, it seems like every image is "fuzzy" after I scan them.

They don't as appear sharp and crisp as when I look at the slide on a light box

under a lupe. The colors also seem dark - any detail in the shadows is lost

after I scan this. Anyone have similar problems with this or other film

scanners?

[tim_huggins]

Scans always need to be touched up. The degree and exact nature depend on the scanner and it's software. But as a general rule, pretty much any scan I've ever done tend to look muddy and required pulling up the contrast and saturation to get anything close to the appearance of the original slide.

 

Keep in mind that a scan will never look "as good" as the original slide. The technologies are completely different and the color, resolution and tonality of a tranny cannot even be approached by an electronic image.

[anthony_r]

All files will require sharpening in post (after scanning. I do not recommend sharpening at

the scan). You should make sure that all detail in the slide is captured at the scan. If you

aren't seeing shadow detail in the scan, it's most likely user error. I am not familiar with your

scanner and I don't know if your monitor is calibrated nor what color space you are using or

if you are outputting the file to your printer correctly, but as stated above, a chrome on a

lightbox through a loupe will not look exactly the same as it does on screen or in

print....without some tweaking.

[j_yabrow1]

Hi Lisa,

 

I've done lots of slide scans on a Polaroid SS4000, which I believe is a slightly earlier form of the 4000tf you're using. I've had pretty much the same results with many of my slide scans. As others have noted, scanned slides are never that sharp, but you should be able to sharpen them post-scan and get sharp-looking results for just about any print or display size. In my experience, slides that looked great on a light box often scanned dark and muddy, especially in the shadow areas. Sometimes slides with mostly light colors, or ones that were somewhat overexposed scanned much better. I had no trouble with C41 or B&W negatives on that scanner. I believe that slide film has too great a density range for that kind of scanner to "punch through", and unfortunately 35mm scanners like the 4000tf may not be up to the job for slides. I've tried flatbeds, but they were much worse. I've had some of my slides drum scanned, and they came out almost exactly like they look under a lupe (a bit less sharp, but still great). I'm still looking for a cost-effective way of getting high-quality scans of my slides. Drum scans are very expensive.

 

I've heard good things about scanning slide film with the Nikon Medium format desktop scanners (the 8000 and 9000) and the Minolta Scan Multi Pro (long discontinued), although I've never used them myself. I suspect they may be better for slide film because they were designed more for "professionals" to whom slide film was much more important than those in the general 35mm market. The Microtek/Polaroid scanners have a claimed dmax of 3.4, whereas the medium format scanners claim dmax values of 4.2 and higher. While those numbers are highly suspect, they do indicate that the medium format scanners can read a higher density range than the 4000tf--which may explain the better results with slide filem that I've read about. The Nikon 4000 (35mm) scanner has a dmax of 4.2, you might try that one.

 

Not sure if this is at all helpful to you, but I wish you the best of luck with your scanning.

[Karim Ghantous]

Perhaps it could be that the slide is upside down? Something simple like that. Sorry though but I haven't scanned slides on anything but a flatbed so I can't offer anything much more useful. ;-)

[g._armour_van_horn]

I managed to get a couple of defective ArtixScan units and had fits with the driver, but I never had a problem with sharpness. Is it possible that the unit was dropped or otherwise knocked out of focus?

 

Van

[lisa_taute1]

Thank you all for your comments.

 

Van - in your experience with the ArtixScan series is there a way to manually focus them (maybe that's a feature dependent on how much money one spends)? I don't recall seeing one. Incidentally, I am using color calibrated monitor, printer and scanner. The scanner color calibration is based on ICC profiles I've either created or purchased and are specific to the film I used - usually Velvia or Kodachrome.

 

I have done some post-sharpening as some of you have mentioned, but it still looks like the image is out of focus when I know it's not. Not much I can do about the muddy dark areas. It really took moving to a digital camera to really see how bad the scanned images were (sorry to say I didn't notice the issue when I bought it several years ago).

 

I've recently purchased another computer so I need to set the scanner up again. I'll try to do that this week and post an image for you to see. Thanks again for your assistance and guidance.

[g._armour_van_horn]

No, there is no user-configurable way to focus the lens in this scanner. I haven't taken one apart to see where the adjustment is, or even if there is one. There could be an adjustment that a qualified tech could make, or not. If not, something could have gotten bent or come loose. It's definitely something for Microtek support to look into, probably involving sending the scanner back to Microtek. I haven't had to talk to them for several years, but they were pretty good when I did.

 

Van