Is it ok talking about ART 300 scanning?

[marciofs]

If so, I am looking for advices because the scan from this paper looks terrible.

 

[Ian Grant]

You've made a print and used an analog route. so fine. It's necessary to scan to post images here.

Unfortunately some papers don't scan well, Glossy RC papers scan very well, pearl not sowell and the same goes for Fibre based papers. I've noy used Art 300 but I'd expect it to be worst of all.

Try re-photographing your prints using careful lighting.

Ian

 

[marciofs]

You've made a print and used an analog route. so fine. It's necessary to scan to post images here.

Unfortunately some papers don't scan well, Glossy RC papers scan very well, pearl not sowell and the same goes for Fibre based papers. I've noy used Art 300 but I'd expect it to be worst of all.

Try re-photographing your prints using careful lighting.

Ian

I didn't think about taking the photo of the print...

I will try. Thanks.

 

[winger]

I haven't found a great way to accurately scan Art300, yet. I'm also not really trying that hard because my only goal with them is to share them here, not to reproduce them from the scan. Photographing them might work, but you'll have to be really careful with the lighting to not get too much sheen showing.

 

[Vaughn]

Same problem with platinum prints, etc. Re-photographing is a good idea.