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] RE: Re:digitising slides

  • To: lexa@lexa.ru
  • Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Re:digitising slides
  • From: "Jack Phipps" <JPhipps@asf.com>
  • Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 05:31:24 -0500
  • Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk

Hello Laurie!

Yes, this is for a photographer who already owns a sturdy tripod and a high
resolution digital camera with a good lens. If you just happen to have an
old Beseler color head available, why not use it? If not, be sure you have a
good light source (diffused light, proper color temperature). You don't
stitch the images together; you take three exposures in quick succession at
different exposures of the full image (handled automatically by the D100
with the bracketing function). Then you bring them into Photoshop on three
different layers. If you wanted to you could make as many exposures as you
deem necessary to produce the range you want. That is why he included the
example of 17 exposures so you can understand how to combine as many images
as you desire. If you don't have any shadow detail or highlight detail you
are interested in, you can just use one exposure.

The purpose of this project was to capture 1000s of slides that he uses as a
slideshow for his elderly parents. His father was a prolific photographer
and he is getting to where he has trouble with the slide projector. Now the
slideshow starts automatically for them at their bedside on an Apple iMac.

His Photoshop script not only combines the three images into one (one image
looks into the shadows, one into the highlights and one for the normally
exposed parts of the image), but it applies Digital SHO, Digital ROC and
Digital GEM to further enhance the images in an automatic fashion.

I saw him scan 400 slides in several hours, load them onto his computer and
start the script. The script ran over night and late the next day he had 400
beautiful images (if you think old family photos are beautiful).

I didn't say it would be easy, just that it can be done and done very
efficiently with excellent results for the intended purpose. We're not
talking about make 20x30 prints, just something that looks good on a
computer display.

Alf Wiedersehen!

Jack Phipps
Applied Science Fiction

-----Original Message-----
Unfortunately, as I read it, it make take as long to copy the slides with a
digital camera using this techniques as it would to scan them using a
scanner when all is said and done between taking the three exposures and
piecing them together in PS - not to mention the equipment and space
requirements to set up the copy setup ( e.g. tripods, Beseler colorhead or
other source of controlable diffuse projected light source, remote shutter
release, etc.)  Unless one has the equipment already and the space, it might
be cheaper to get a good film scanner.

I know the statment says:
        I piece the three exposures together in a PS script to get a density
        that would make a drum scanner blush.  Scans as fast as you can hit
        shutter release 3 times.
However, it is unclear first how long it takes to devise and establish the
correct PS script for piecing the three exposures together, second if the
same script is appropriate for all slides no matter what their original
nature and density ranges are, and third the amount of time it takes to
export the three exposures to PS and place them one the appropriate leayers
that are to be pieced together.  This is not a criticism per se; but it is
only meant to say that it may not be as simple and quick as the statement
implies - "Scans as fast as you hit the shutter release 3 times."

It is also unclear how the paragraph on the relationship of exposures to
layers relates to the PS script since the rest of the statement talks about
3 exposures but this talkes about as many as 17 layers.

I would be interested in hearing any additional elaborations on this.

-----Original Message-----

Guten Tag Rob!
As a matter of fact our chief scientist has done just that.

Here is an excerpt from someone asking a similar question on another forum:

If the exposures are equal, you want to average them equally.  In layers
this means the bottom should be 100% and the next 50%.  Now the third should
be 33% so that you see 1/3 of that layer, and 2/3 of half of each below, do
the math, exactly 1/3 of all three.  Fourth layer should be 1/4 or 25%,
fifth should be 1/5...  17th should be 1/17.

Be very careful.  I use a "big'ol" tripod, set the D100 to pre-mirror-up
with time delay, and a remote shutter release and even then it is VERY hard
to hold sub-pixel alignment.  Don't try this with a telephoto lens or
outside in the wind.

I use this to scan slides.  I have the D100 set to bracket three exposures
at the widest range, and a Bessler colorhead with diffuse illumination.  I
piece the three exposures together in a PS script to get a density range
that would make a drum scanner blush.  Scans as fast as you can hit the
shutter release 3 times.  Use this technique when you need to capture a
brightness range outside the ability of your digital camera.

End of excerpt.

As you can see, he takes three pictures of each slide to give him the
quality he wants.

I hope this helps!

Jack Phipps
Applied Science Fiction

-----Original Message-----
From: Op's

has anyone done a comparison on copying a slide with a digital camera
say Nikon D100 60mm macro lens (6Mp 17M tiff file) with scanning it to a
file with a film scanner?

I was thinking of putting all my old slides to CD and a film scanner
would take too long

has anyone used this method and how do the results compare?



Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.