Filmscanners mailing list archive (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] Re: Tips For Sharp Scans Using Nikon 5000 ED
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Tips For Sharp Scans Using Nikon 5000 ED
From: "Karen and John Hinkey" <email@example.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:02:05 -0700
Delivery-date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:02:09 +0100
List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> (No HTML, plain text only)
List-subscribe: <mailto:email@example.com> (use 'Subscribe firstname.lastname@example.org')
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:email@example.com> (use 'Unsubscribe firstname.lastname@example.org')
References: <4ABD23B3.email@example.com> <14388C583561450D82E1081C89F5B1EF@prestond45ba87>
Thanks for the response - however I was not referring to post-scan image
adjustments, but rather obtaining the sharpest raw scan (e.g., obtaining
the best focus) from this new-to-me scanner.
I have a lot of experience sharpening images from DSLR raw files so that
is not the issue.
I managed to get my old SS4000 to work for a while and compared scans of
the same slide between the SS4000 and 5000 ED and found that when using
Vuescan the results were very similar regarding sharpness, although the
raw image came out noticeably better with Vuescan. I found that using
NikonScan did not produce quite as sharp of scan for whatever reason.
Anyone have hints as to why the NikonScan image was not quite as sharp?
Did I have some basic parameter wrong?
The reason I'm interested in using NikonScan is I am getting the SF-210
slide feeding and I'm not sure that Vuescan supports it - is this correct?
Preston Earle wrote:
> Karen or John Hinkey asked, "Well, I just bought a used 5000 ED to scan a
> good part of my slides (I'm all digital now) as my SS4000 has seen its last
> days. Any tips on getting the sharpest scans possible from it? I have
> VueScan, so that's an option."
> I don't know anything about the 500ED, but I do know a little about
> sharpening. I think the most important thing is not to try to get perfectly
> sharp scans from the scanner. Proper sharpness is dependant on image size
> (and thus, resolution), so it should be the last step in producing an
> image--after defect-elimination, after color- correction, and, finally,
> after resizing to the appropriate image size/resolution for whatever the use
> for that image is. A screen image, a 4x6 print, and an 8x10 print will all
> be sharpened differently. Some people suggest sharpening a little in the
> scanner, but I think it's best to turn off all sharpening in the scanning
> process and apply it only after all other image processing has been done. I
> find that using unsharp masking in Photoshop with settings of threshold = 3,
> radius = resolution in ppi/200, and amount = whatever gives the right look
> when viewed on screen with the image size set to show the actual finished
> image size (100%, 4"x6", 8"x10", etc.).
> There is also a high-radius-low-amount method that you can read more about
> in Dan Margulis's Professional Photoshop book:
> He has posted the chapter on sharpening on-line at
> http://www.ledet.com/margulis/PP5E_Ch06_r1.pdf but there is much more in the
> Preston Earle
John & Karen Hinkey
Unsubscribe by mail to firstname.lastname@example.org, with 'unsubscribe
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or