Scanner techniques?

[mikep1]

As part of the "discussion" on my last post (ooo...nice boat) it

occurred to me that some of the photos I see on this site look quite

good; others, and I include mine, do not. I'm referring to the

technical quality, not whether or not the photo is pleasing or

whatever.

 

The process I have been using to get a photo posted is to scan it

into the computer at max resolution on my Nikon LS30 (2700DPI), crop

it if needed, then resize it to a 511 by whatever pixel size as a

JPEG, and then post it. The postings never look very good. Is my

scanner insufficient? Am I doing something wrong in processing the

scan?

 

Also, I have never been able to get a photo to show with the message

even though I have followed the instructions on how to do it.

Someone else noted that they couldn't get one of my JPEGS to do it

either.

 

I don't use Photoshop - preferring PW Pro - but perhaps there is some

issue with the way they save JPEGS. I don't understand why that

would be the case though...PW Pro JPEGS work fine on every other

application or message.

 

Any ideas?

[walterh]

Mike it would help if you tell us what exactly in your postings seems not right to you. is it sharpness or colors or too light, too dark?

without seeing the comparison, just how the original looks - we cant really suggest improvements.

cheers

walter

 

 

PS: the boat looked technically ok to me. the comments were really not to positive since it looked like a nice snapshot about a nice boat if i did get this correctly. so it might be better posted in a boat forum. some people take the opportunity to comment then less enthusiastic.

[gerald_widen]

To me your scans look decent. Not great but not that bad. Scanned images usually need to be corrected some way in an after scanning program. I use Photoshop which I'm not that good at but can do the basics. Usually slightly increasing saturation (if color)contrast,maybe brightness and sharpening. I wish I knew how to work in layers and do more complex tasks including cloning to remove spots/objects and dodging and burning.

[brambor]

Could I get a link to the boat forum?Mike, try to post a picture and then ask for critique of the scan. Tell us what you don't like and we'll try to help.

[EricM]

Rene, click on Mike�s name, and follow the trail�just like metadata

[mskovacs]

I use a Nikon LS-30 for all my 35mm work. Is it colour neg, transparency or B&W that is giving you the most trouble?

 

For a start, I choose Hamrick's Viewscan for colour negative, often for slides, often for B&W negs. It does a better job converting colour negs into positives than Nikon scan. It allows for multiple pass scanning when you need to pull shadow detail out of slides. I would highly recommend scanning B&W as a positive then inverting it in photoshop. Made all the difference for me.

 

To create online images I first convert them to an sRGB colour profile, then resample, then use the "save for web" feature of photoshop. If I forget to convert to sRGB, the images look flat.

 

Have a look in my photo.net portfolio for many examples. I'm not the greatest photographer but I think I've made many faithful scans, mostly of colour transparency materials. I also use an Epson 3200 flatbed for medium format.

[carl smith]

It's generally considered polite on forums to include the link, even if you are incapable of doing the necessary html. For the HTML challenged however, here is a link to the <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/uploaded-file?bboard_upload_id=18021884" target="_blank">boat picture</a>. It will pop up in a new window.

[steve g]

Often scanners introduce a certain loss of contrast to a scanned image. You then must readjust contrast with the command 'curves' in photoshop. I am not really sure if whatever you are using has that. Also, sometimes you need to play with hue/saturation to get the image looking like what you envisioned or what the slide/neg/print looked like. Occassionally a little USM (unsharp mask) helps resharpen an image that has lost some of its sharpness in scanning. All these things are commands in photoshop, but I do not know about the commands in the program you use. I know they help me trememdously in getting a scanned image to look like what the wetprint or slide looks like.

[doug herr]

I find that different films require different scanning and processing techniques but common to all the techniques is an understanding and intelligent use of Curves adjustments. Contrast in a scan that looks 'flat' can be fixed with a Curves adjustment to give it more sparkle without clipping highlights or blocking up shadows. Tonal differences can be emphasized or minimized and color corrections can be much more precise as well. Better yet, use a Curves adjustment layer instead of applying the adjustment to the original image data. Repeated adjutments to the original data can result in a loss of tonality.

<P>

In a nutshell, here's what I do:

<P>

1) get rid of dust & scratches

<BR>

2) set white point, black point and approximate color balance with Levels adjustment layer

<BR>

3) use Curves adjustment layer to tweak contrast and fine-tune the color balance

<CENTER>

<A HREF="http://www.wildlightphoto.com" target="_blank">

<IMG SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/land/towercreek.jpg">

</A>

<BR>

<B>Tower Creek detail</B>, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming<BR>

<I>Leicaflex SL2, 60mm Macro-Elmarit-R, TMax 100</I>

</CENTER>

[beau 1664876222]

At the risk of sounding immodest, I suppose I'm one of those who posts the better-looking scans because I get a lot of emails from photo-netters asking me for scanning tips.

 

This is the usual response I give: if you are scanning with an eye to making it look "right" straight from the scanner, you're losing a lot of quality. A good raw scan looks really flat and dreary, because you're trying to pack the whole tonal scale into a limited dynamic range. But properly done, these flat, low-saturation scans will really come alive when you do adjustments in your image editing program.

 

I'd suggest you invest in VueScan if you haven't already -- it lets you mess with different settings while seeing the effect real-time in a histogram. And you should be looking at the histogram while scanning, NOT the picture.

 

Incidentally, I'm selling my trusty Nikon IV, the one I used to do all the images in my folders; see the classifieds if you're interested.

[EricM]

Carl, polite or not, in the future, Rene needn�t post this question again, and tune into the thread waiting for an answer. A simple hint to something that may take months for self discovery. This, as my intention, is more helpful.

[brambor]

ehem. sorry. It was an attempt for a passive aggressive joke. I asked for a Boat Forum link. There is no boat forum at photo.net but if anyone wants to go to one then here is a link:

<a href="http://www.kayakforum.com/cgi-bin/Building/index.cgi">Boat Forum</a>

[john_brewton]

Yeah, Mike, I have the same problem. However, I can rectify problems if I go to a certain program, but that program only lets me file the completed print on my desktop NOT on my internet files making it impossible to send to anyone. I've got a so-called guru coming over this weekend to help me sort it all out so I've got my fingers crossed. It's a real pain in the butt to take a great shot and then have it turn to mush on the scanner.

[timothy_nelson]

Much good advice above. I join them in urging you to use ViewScan to run your

scanner. In addition to the advantages already described, it includes many film

profiles that can match more closely the characteristics of your film than the generic

profiles used by NikonScan and other such software. You can test different profiles on

the same raw scan and view the effect before you save it, or you can save the raw

scan and apply a profile later. ViewScan is the only software I've tried that enabled my

Nikon scanner to capture full range scans of my TriX negs, without shadow or

highlight clipping. My experience has been that with the right profile, TriX and Delta

100 scans look like straight contact prints, without resorting to scanning as positives

and inverting. My Fujicolor negative scans, with VS set to automatic white balance,

seem to need little other than a little boost in saturation in Photoshop, and usually

not even that. All you really need to do in Photoshop (or whatever you prefer to use)

for straight photos is to downsize, sharpen, convert to sRGB, and Save for Web.