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: Novice scanner

The best place to start is at http://www.scantips.com/
Wayne Fulton's information is succinct and accurate and will give you much good 
information.  He also sells a book including more information, though I have 
not bought it.

Optimal resolution to be sent to an hp printer is 300dpi, and to an Epson is 
360dpi.  A scan of a 35mm film image results, on the LS-30 at 2700spi yields a 
3800x2500 pixel image, approximately.  Sending that to the printer results in a 
360dpi image at the 8x10 size, but only 220dpi at 11x17.  If the resulting 
11x17 print looks good to you, then all is well.  Theoretically, a 4000spi 
filmscanner would result in a better print.

The 'grain' is hard to deal with - enlarge to 100% and see what it looks like.  
You may have to apply some noise filters in Photoshop or whatever image program 
you are using - median, gaussian blur, dust & scratches, or whatever works.  Be 
sure to apply them in individual color channels only - I find it helpful to 
change to LAB color space, apply the median filter in the A and B channels, and 
dust & scratches in the L channel.

Banding is generally a problem in broad expanses of the same color - especially 
blue sky.  A way around it is to select the sky using a mask of some sort, then 
apply (again) a median filter in the appropriate channels, or a gaussian blur.  
This will even out the colors and inhibit banding.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Pendley" <jpendley@alltel.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Novice scanner

| At 09:42 AM 11/21/2001 -0600, you wrote:
| >First question - how large do you like to print?  If larger than 8 1/2 x 
| >11" then you probably should get a 4000spi scanner instead of the 
| >Acer.  If not then the Acer should be fine.
| I like prints larger than 8 1/2 x 11 if the resolution is there.  I found a 
| math formula somewhere that produced the number 11 for the width of prints 
| with a 2720 scanner.  I supposed that would mean an 11" square print, or 
| maybe an 11 x 17.  You don't think the ScanWit will be satisfactory at 11 x 
| >The grain that prints out - do you see it onscreen as well or only in the 
| >print?
| It's hard to say.  When I enlarge the color image that has all the red 
| dots, almost to the stage of seeing the pixels, there is definitely color 
| spotting in the shadowed part of the church wall, but it's not the same red 
| dots that I get in a print.  When I enlarge the B&W image on the screen, 
| more and more grain becomes visible.
| >If only in the print then it sounds like a printer problem - try cleaning 
| >the nozzles with Epson's software.
| There's definitely some kind of "grain" on the screen, though not exactly 
| what I'm getting in prints, at least in color, anyway.  I have used Epson's 
| three utilities (clean nozzle, etc.) three or four times.
| >  If onscreen then it may be what is called "dust and scratches".  You 
| > have probably read references to Digital ICE and to Vuescan's Dust and 
| > Scratches filter similar to ICE - they both help but they need an IR 
| > (infrared) channel to work.  Another possible reason to switch scanners 
| > as the ScanWit 2720S does not have the IR channel though their 2740 does.
| I didn't know that Vuescan had an ICE-type feature; as you say, it would 
| not help with the 2720, anyway.
| >There is also an article on what is called Grain Aliasing at
| >http://www.photoscientia.co.uk/Grain.htm - you might want to read that.
| Thanks; I'll read it right after I finish here.
| >Despite the discussions I would not be leery of the Nikon - I have the 
| >Nikon LS-30 and am very satisfied with it.  I also would not worry about 
| >Polaroid's problems - the price is excellent with the $200 rebate, and 
| >David Hemingway of Polaroid participates in this group and has assured us 
| >the product is still being manufactured and rebates processed.  I tend to 
| >trust his word on that.
| That's good to know about David.  At the moment, if I were to get a new 
| scanner, it would be between the Polaroid and the Canoscan 4000.  The Nikon 
| might be a terrific scanner, but the price is a bit high for me.
| >The banding problem is more particularized - when you print an image, what 
| >format is the image in (PSD, TIFF, JPEG, or what?)?  And what is the 
| >resolution that you are sending to the printer?
| First, I have prints with no visible banding.  They were made using the 
| same settings as the prints that do show banding.  I have been printing @ 
| 6.666 x 10, as I like the 2:3 format of 35mm.  I've set the resolution at 
| 300 dpi, and all prints are from TIFF files.  What seems even more puzzling 
| is that the slide that shows the most banding also shows bands in the scan 
| on the monitor.
| >Good luck to you!  I started late myself.
| >
| >Maris Lidaka Sr
| Thanks for your willingness to help Maris.  I hope that my answers to your 
| questions will give you some new ideas.
| Regards,
| John


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.