Please Sign a Petition to Get Adobe to Make a Proper DUST and SCRATCHES Tool for Scans

[NortheastPhotographic]

http://chng.it/hqXLvkTzcT

It's nearly 2020 and we're still finding dust and scratches by hand using the brush tools. I'm quite confident Adobe could develop a tool to address this using content aware technology.

I'm not sure if they will listen, but it can't hurt to ask.

 

[jtk]

ICE solved that problem a long time ago for Nikon...Epson evidently messed it up on behalf of its low priced "ice" (not really Digital Ice like Nikon's), but I've read it works for it's top version . Most DSLRs and Mirrorless can vanish dust automatically or with push of a button..but that's for sensors, not fillum. Dust/scratches are either damaged film surface or dust on film surface, a mechanical problem rather than digital problem.

 

[Lachlan Young]

ICE only works if you have a IR record - which is why the Frontier SP3000 has IR LED's along with the RGB. Beyond that, it's a question of differentiation of dust & specular highlights etc - content awareness can help, but even so, it's not perfect.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Right, digital ICE is great and all. But digital cameras don't have it, nor to drum scanners, Imacons, or IQSmarts. B&W film also can't use it.

I just feel that Adobe could make a tool that is if not perfect, a huge improvement. Sign the petition and MAYBE it happens. Better than not trying at all IMO.

 

[jtk]

Specular highlights, assuming they're in the image (chrome, lights, over-exposure etc) are ignored by Ice. In other words, no matter what you photograph, has nothing to do with content awareness. It's good for dust from changing of lenses and scratches from reloaded or low-quality 35mm carts.

 

[jtk]

Right, digital ICE is great and all. But digital cameras don't have it, nor to drum scanners, Imacons, or IQSmarts. B&W film also can't use it.

I just feel that Adobe could make a tool that is if not perfect, a huge improvement. Sign the petition and MAYBE it happens. Better than not trying at all IMO.

Digital Ice in proper (i.e. Nikon...and even Minolta in my brief experience before I dumped it ) does fine with B&W, with the exception of Kodalith, possibly due to its clear estar base .

Cattle Auction in my Media is an example.

I don't think Adobe owes anything to film users... talk to Epson.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Digital Ice in proper (i.e. Nikon...and even Minolta in my brief experience before I dumped it ) does fine with B&W, with the exception of Kodalith, possibly due to its clear estar base .

Cattle Auction in my Media is an example.

I don't think Adobe owes anything to film users... talk to Epson.

They owe their subscribers new tools. It costs nothing to just sign the petition and ask for the tool. If they see enough interest, they might just do it. No ask, no get.

 

[jtk]

They owe their subscribers new tools. It costs nothing to just sign the petition and ask for the tool. If they see enough interest, they might just do it. No ask, no get.

No problem with your philosophy but it'd be smarter to "ask" a company that is involved with scanning, such as Epson in particular, than a company that isn't at all (such as Adobe or Ilford or ...Nike).

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

No problem with your philosophy but it'd be smarter to "ask" a company that is involved with scanning, such as Epson in particular, than a company that isn't at all (such as Adobe or Ilford or ...Nike).

A dust finding plug in or tool doesn't have anything to do with scanning. By the time you're dusting the image is a TIFF, JPG, raw file, etc. Finding and cloning in a white spec in a field of green grass isn't that much more complicated than auto-selecting a tree and allowing the user to move it around.

Plus asking adobe to look into this costs literally nothing save maybe 30 seconds. They probably won't do it, but why complain about the asking? If you believe there is someone else more suited to this task, fine, maybe they'll notice a big number of users asked Adobe for it and the petition went unanswered.

 

[gorbas]

Done! Thank you for the initiative!

 

[MattKing]

No problem with your philosophy but it'd be smarter to "ask" a company that is involved with scanning, such as Epson in particular, than a company that isn't at all (such as Adobe or Ilford or ...Nike).

This doesn't address the needs of those who seek to use DSLRs for digitizing film.
Corel would be a good target for this - it would help them differentiate their Paintshop Pro and Aftershot products from the Adobe products.

 

[jtk]

Ive just digitized 500+ Kodachromes ...whew! Most were shot by me in the 70s-80s... Hardly any dust, no scratches. Not on my B+W either (Nikon-scanned, like my Ektachrome).

If dust/scratches are a big problem that suggests better practises. Years ago I managed slide duplication and slide graphics for corporate clients..rarely saw dust/scratches, perhaps because they considered their photos to be valuable.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Ive just digitized 500+ Kodachromes ...whew! Most were shot by me in the 70s-80s... Hardly any dust, no scratches. Not on my B+W either (Nikon-scanned, like my Ektachrome).

If dust/scratches are a big problem that suggests better practises. Years ago I managed slide duplication and slide graphics for corporate clients..rarely saw dust/scratches, perhaps because they considered their photos to be valuable.

Well that's the thing, when you scan lots of film from lots of different sources you can't really control how the film was stored. Plus more resolution and more surface area equals more dust. Why not have a tool that helps with this? Just to punish people who don't keep their film under perfect conditions? Take that a little further and you could say that spot toner shouldn't have been manufactured because clearly people should have been able to print dust free film 100% of the time.

 

[jtk]

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

An engineer for Adobe has reached out to me and he's working on a solution. Please help at this link: https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/hYftyfxZK48MTe69G6uwV

 

[Bob Carnie]

Most of the issues with dust on scans is the embedded crap within the gelatin coatings not surface dust which ICE programs in the past work on. This would be one incredible advancement to be able to select what is crap and what is not...just saying. I will continue to dust bust one pixel group at a time for the time being.