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]

Re: filmscanners: Scanning B&W negatives



Mrio,

You said .

"Most people say that, with 12 bits depth scans , there is no advantage
in tuning prior to scan over working the scan in Photoshop".

You are of course aware that the Minolta is 16 bit?

I  have the Epson 1290 and am reading about  the many independant ink
systems available for it (and your 1270).

This is a fine bulletin board for our great media.

Ian
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mrio Teixeira" <mjteixeira@yahoo.com>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Scanning B&W negatives


> Ian,
>
> Sorry for the confusion that I caused. In the first post, I  referred
my
> films brandt and age to better define their features, just in case
this
> would be important for some suggestions for  scanning them. I was
> particularly thinking about their fine grain.
>
> In my second post I just snipped badly. I was so enthusiastic with my
> results that I stopped just in time to avoid saying something like "ei
> everybody, come and see the wonderful results that I got and how I am
living
> again so many important moments in my life!"  :-)  .
>
> I should have quoted only that I intended to put "dynamic range" in
> automatic, disable all the other tunings in the scanning software,
obtain
> "pure" raw files for archiving purposes and do all the tuning work in
> Photoshop 6. This is my workflow for slides. Most people say that,
with 12
> bits depth scans , there is no advantage in tuning prior to scan over
> working the scan in Photoshop. I read a person that stressed that
things are
> not absolutely like that, I don't remember already who and where, but
my
> learning curve is not yet so high to study myself these very
intersting but,
> for now, difficult subjects.
>
> Perhaeps because, with my Nikon F5 excellent metering and a little
with my
> experience, it is almost an impossible mission to get a ugly exposed
slide,
> the workflow above has worked well for me. Not the same with my
sometimes
> ugly exposed or developed B&W negatives where I must tune the dynamic
range
> IN the scanning software and sometimes cut large portions of the
histogram,
> or I will not be able to get acceptable contrast in Photoshop. I am
> discovering that perhaeps this also happens in well exposed negatives
with
> very high or very low contrasts.
>
> I never thought that B&W print was a so complicated subjet and, for
now, I
> cannot go further than my Epson 1270 with Epson inks. While the prints
that
> I am obtaining are acceptable, I expect to get in the future much
better. So
> I am with a problem -- I have no way to be sure that I am tuning well
in the
> scanning sofware.
>
> Sorry for the very long post.
>
> Mrio Teixeira
> mjteixeira@yahoo.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian Jackson" <Ian_Jackson@blueyonder.co.uk>
> To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, 25 October, 2001 1:42 AM
> Subject: Re: filmscanners: Scanning B&W negatives
>
>
> | Mario,
> |
> | Do you mean that for FP4/FP5 its much better to adjust contrast
during
> | scanning than in photoshop?
> |
> | Ian
> | ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Mrio Teixeira" <mjteixeira@yahoo.com>
> | To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
> | Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 8:43 AM
> | Subject: Re: filmscanners: Scanning B&W negatives
> |
> |
> | >
> | > I wrote:
> | >
> | > | , I will begin with my old B&W negatives (several hundreds),
mainly
> | Ilford
> | > | FP4 and HP5, many of them more than 30 years old
> | > ..........|
> | > | I intend to: scan at 4000 ppi, gray scale 16 bits; "dynamic
> | range" --
> | > | automatic, but all the other tunings in the scanning software
> | (including
> | > | unsharp mask) disabled; save the raw scans as TIF. I don't
intend to
> | > "work"
> | > | the photos in the scanner, but after in Photoshop.
> | >
> | > Ho ho, that's not so easy!...  With B&W I must "make decisions"
before
> | > getting the "untouched archival scan" -- with very contrasted or
very
> | > uniform
> | > scenes, underexposed or overexposed negatives, etc, I must tune
> | manually the
> | > "dynamic range" (sometimes dramatic cuts in the histogram) or I
will
> | not get
> | > good results in Photoshop.
> | >
> | > And not several hundreds but a few thousands -- digital retouching
is
> | a
> | > miracle!
> | >
> | > I thank very much all the help and suggestions that I received.
> | >
> | > Best regards,
> | >
> | > Mrio Teixeira
> | > mjteixeira@yahoo.com
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > _________________________________________________________
> | > Do You Yahoo!?
> | > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> | >
> |
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.