Scanning - Improving shadow areas

[Ben wright]

I've also noticed that when I try to lighten shadows that really don't have much data, they just amplify the noise. Better off keeping them black. There's nothing to see there anyway. Work on the lighter areas where people are looking. It's there that it's important. Additionally, black shadows can create interest. Blacks add contrast and delight the eye. Use it advantageously.

I think what's happened is that because technology has allowed us to "rescue" shadow areas, we think we have to do it. After all, why did Adobe give it to us in Photoshop if not to use? But that doesn't mean it's aesthetically of interest. Just because we can do something, doesn't mean it's best to do it. Leaving things alone is often a better path.

Thanks Alan - yes im a big fan of the deep blacks in general and 100% agree with you on the technology front. Think there is some confusion on a few of my posts that this is about shadow recovery which it is not. It was more to do with the noise in the deep blacks and how to get rid of it either through in camera technique or addressing any scanning concerns so that shadow areas render as pure black like I usually get if I enlarge in a darkroom print.

It seems that by switching from my rather elaborate old scanning method to the 16bit greyscale has helped somewhat and think improvement on the 'at time of capture' side of things will also help. As another comment suggested, might be down to the limitations of the scanner when its is effectively clear film base to deal with. It seems my older elaborate RGB 48bit DNG route might have done exactly what you suggested and along the way pushed the shadows up resulting in the unacceptably noisy black areas. Your previous comment was actually very help in coming to the realisation that some of these night time flash shots i've been trying might actually be generally very underexposed and that just because you can bump them up in PS (or as an accidental consequence in a long process) its best not to!

 

[Ben wright]

Exactly what you need to do so that in future shots you have an idea of what you can expect to get from a system perspective.

Perhaps you just want to tame an otherwise too contrasty Kodak Ektar 100 taken in bad light . . .

Or maybe you want to reach shadow and blown highlights in Kodak Portra 400 . . .

If you ever get blown out highlights from today's ultrawide latitude films, you know something's not right or perhaps you were in the midst of a supernova . . .

Due to limitations of display media - screen or print, you may need to use post to show what you want seen.

Thank you for these examples Les - really useful and quite impressive recovery in some of those!

 

[Les Sarile]

So then it's being combined afterward? Doesn't it capture the whole range in one scan so you can adjust the shadow slider afterwards and obtain the same results?

The HDR software ideally combines an under, optimal and over into one "flatter" image. In this case I believe the one scan does capture everything and to the rightmost image "Analog Gain 0 Shadows Tool" that is the default scan with an application of shadows tool. The HDR image to its left is the three exposures combined by HDR. It does have a look that maybe aesthetically pleasing to others. Just another tool to provide a different look.

 

[Les Sarile]

Thank you for these examples Les - really useful and quite impressive recovery in some of those!

It is really the film doing its thing. When I suggest to apply ample overexposure, I mean to be very liberal about it. For instance below is a comparison of Kodak Portra 400, Ektar 100 and a few digis. I simply start a known good baseline exposure and just start applying more until it blows out. With the digis, even RAW they are unrecoverable starting at +3 and nothing past +5. With Ektar 100 apparently I didn't go far enough and obviously with Portra 400 +10 is still quite useful. Because even then some white balance and levels and you can still get the full crayola box enlargement below +8, +9 and +10.

So unless you are doing critical color work - like advertizing and Coca Cola red is the ad or some such, you're good to go.

 

[ced]

Did you just use PS noise reduction to achieve that?

Yes, Only PS Ben.