Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

filmscanners: Somewhat OT:was Scanning 101...A basic question...


  • To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
  • Subject: filmscanners: Somewhat OT:was Scanning 101...A basic question...
  • From: "Lynn Allen" <lynn_allen@angelfire.com>
  • Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:01:08 -0400
  • Content-language: en
  • List-help: <mailto:majordomo@lists.cix.co.uk> 'help' as msg. text
  • Mailing-list: filmscanners; contact: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
  • Organization: Angelfire (http://email.angelfire.mailcity.lycos.com:80)

 
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 10:45:43  
 Marvin Demuth wrote:
>I have read the recent debates over working with raw files and those 
>produced via profiles and I am confused.
>
>In working with scanning color negatives, if you choose to work with the 
>raw file that is supposed to have all the information in pure form, what is 
>your starting point for getting an acceptable image on your monitor as your 
>starting point for your adjustments?  Obviously, some software has to used.
>
>I am trying to relate this to printing color negatives, which is within my 
>experience.  With this process, for any degree of efficiency, you have to 
>start with color filtration commensurate with the film you are using.
=====

Confusion is part of the process, certainly in my experience! :-)

I don't know what scanner you're using; that's important. Using "profiles" can 
be confusing, and with the help of a few Filmscanners, I've learned what they 
are about. What they are about is mainly concerned with going from one medium 
from another, or one "device" to another. Since you're going for prints, they 
*are* important. "Real Life Photoshop" is a book that details the various 
choices 
of Color Management about as well as anything I've seen. Your library or 
favorite bookstore should have this book.

When you're working with color negs, Raw scans can be (and are) intimidating. 
In the first place, they're backwards, so you normally have to Invert them to 
see what you're looking at. When you do that, you have little idea of what the 
carrier medium (the film itself) has done to you, or your picture. I've found 
that Adjust/Auto Levels in Photoshop does a remarkable job of bringing the 
picture back 'round to where you thought it should be. Not perfect--you'll have 
to "tweak" it--but good. The recent thread about 120 film profiling was very 
informative about what happens when you scan an image.

If you're scanning Raw images into your editing software (Photoshop, 
PicturePerfect, or whatever), you need to either have some idea about what the 
scene looked like at the time, what it *should* have looked like, or what you 
*want* it to look like. That "The Camera Never Lies" is no longer true (cf 
Michael Crichton's "Rising Sun"). The camera, coupled with the software you 
have or can make available, will say almost anything you're capable of making 
it say!

Beyond that, refer back a few msgs to what Ed Hamric had to say about how 
Vuescan deals with film, images, defaults, etc. Very informative.

Filmscanning is neither Rocket Science nor a Perfect 
Science. It's fun, it's interesting, it's on the Edge. 
And for those doing it for a living--it keeps them on their toes and makes them 
better persons! ;-)

Best regards--LRA


Get 250 color business cards for FREE!
http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.