Agreed. I put keepers through Photoshop Elements, mainly to clone out spots and stray hairs, and sometimes to tweak contrast. Grain is perceivable in flat negatives, in less flat ones it's mushy. From a 35mm image grain is my barometer of sharpness, but it shouldn't be confused with digital noise which occurs at lower resolutions, being perceivable at 2400dpi but not 3200 dpi. As you say, a flat negative is a baseline for all other technical judgements.But the key is to have flat negatives.
Thank you. If I understand correctly one of the issues is linearity of conversion between linear (sensor output) and "non-linear" (display), perhaps because such conversions always include errors?
I have a question Shutterfinger, you may be able to help. If you recall I was having problems opening the marquee lines, until I was told to untick that tiny thumbnail box. That fixed things. The other day I was scanning and ticked the thumbnail box again. Now scans are showing the entire 35mm negative plus black rebate edge up to sprocket holes. I'm happy with this, I always aim to shoot without cropping and the black edge suitably cropped adds something. That's mostly how I optically print. However I'm not sure how I arrived at this look as all I did was tick the thumbnail box which previously showed a tightly cropped image - no black rebate. Something changed in the interim and I'm not sure what it was!Take the time to learn the software and limits of each adjustment and problem negatives won't be such a a challenge and different software will be easier to learn.
That's why I want to get the best data possible when scanning. I don't need a software package that delivers a final product (Silverfast?), since, as you correctly state, everything can be done afterwards. In fact, my only concern is if I am getting better data ("resulution", dynamic range) using something other than the included Epson Scan.Everything described here, can be done for better or for worse with other software, and at a later stage. By all means choose the software solution that suits you best.
Could you explain what you said?Or you can apply a simple mathematical function to a "non-linear" scan and get back to exactly the same "linear" scan you would have gotten in the first place... The only exception is when clipping has occurred.
I don't have a clue other than the thumbnail size had been set by a customization and deselecting then reselecting it reset it to default or a different customization.I have a question Shutterfinger
The dynamic range and scan resolution limits are the hardware (lens, mirrors, sensor) limits of the scanner. The resolution limit is the Optical resolution as stated by the manufacturer, above that is upscaling software interpolation.In fact, my only concern is if I am getting better data ("resulution", dynamic range) using something other than the included Epson Scan.
I understand that. But the hardware is controlled by firmware+software and it woudln't be the first application where improvement is possible. If Epson Scan is already getting results limited by hardware only, fine with me.The dynamic range and scan resolution limits are the hardware (lens, mirrors, sensor) limits of the scanner. The resolution limit is the Optical resolution as stated by the manufacturer, above that is upscaling software interpolation.
The dynamic range is the scanners Dmax a stated by the manufacturer.
Could you explain what you said?
Firmware only tells the hardware how to operate and other software how to interpret it. I have never encountered a firmware update for a scanner.I understand that. But the hardware is controlled by firmware+software and it woudln't be the first application where improvement is possible
I don't understand how you applied percentages to the scan machine or post scan processing software. Please explain.Will try, but it may just may just result in more questions... If the data is saved non-linear, which is a common default. (jpeg, tiff etc) then a simplified version of the formula to save the data is Y=X^(1/2.2), where X is the original value and Y is the value to save in the file. e.g. 18% becomes 45%. You can then apply the reverse which is Y=X^2.2 and you are right back were you started from.
If that is just gobbledygook, that's fine, the point being pretty much all imaging software is just math, and many operations are in fact reversible, but not all.
Adjusting black and white points is the only thing you should do in the scanner software and the only way to get all information available in the negative in the scan.Some have claimed that adjusting the white and black points in Epsonscan stretches out the range of the scan to provide initial data that is better than allowing the scanner to scan "flat" and doing it in post. Any thoughts on this?
I don't understand how you applied percentages to the scan machine or post scan processing software. Please explain.
Some have claimed that adjusting the white and black points in Epsonscan stretches out the range of the scan to provide initial data that is better than allowing the scanner to scan "flat" and doing it in post. Any thoughts on this?
Adjusting black and white points is the only thing you should do in the scanner software and the only way to get all information available
With Auto Exposure turned on EpsonScan sets the White and Black points inside the range of usable detail a small amount to increase the contrast in the main part of the image.Some have claimed that adjusting the white and black points in Epsonscan stretches out the range of the scan to provide initial data that is better than allowing the scanner to scan "flat" and doing it in post. Any thoughts on this?
What IO believe I see in my scans is that with Color Correction of, the scan will cover the full range. The resultant picture will have a range on the lower end of the histogram - from let's sy 10 to 180. Then in LR or Elements, I expand the range to 0-255 using the points or Levels.. The result gets me about 95% of the corrections and I tweak from there.Adjusting black and white points is the only thing you should do in the scanner software and the only way to get all information available in the negative in the scan.
In a colour negative you should do this for all three colours.
Regards
Frank
What IO believe I see in my scans is that with Color Correction of, the scan will cover the full range. The resultant picture will have a range on the lower end of the histogram - from let's sy 10 to 180. Then in LR or Elements, I expand the range to 0-255 using the points or Levels.. The result gets me about 95% of the corrections and I tweak from there.
My questions is do I really get more data by pre-adjusting the white and black points (levels) to 0-255 for the scan. Or am I already getting the same bits of data anyway since the range falls into it with as per my example of 10-180? (Note that the scan file size is the same in both cases).
Short answer is NO. If the image scans with black at 10 and white at 180 with no color correction then turning color correction On, and manually setting the black to 10 and the white to 180 or what ever the points that information on the negative starts and ends results in the same information from the negative.My questions is do I really get more data by pre-adjusting the white and black points (levels) to 0-255 for the scan. Or am I already getting the same bits of data anyway since the range falls into it with as per my example of 10-180? (Note that the scan file size is the same in both cases).
If you stay in 16bit AND don't clip, then no difference what so ever. If you save the file as 8 bit then yes it does make a difference.My questions is do I really get more data by pre-adjusting the white and black points (levels) to 0-255 for the scan.
Why is there a difference between 8 and 16 bit?If you stay in 16bit AND don't clip, then no difference what so ever. If you save the file as 8 bit then yes it does make a difference.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?