Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: My First Filmscanner...

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Red face My First Filmscanner...

    so I got the Dual II from CatzManz instead of a fiscal injection into the economy.
    scanned about 24 times using various settings. Non-exhaustive, yet highly exhausting.
    finally realised what WORKFLOW means.
    std stuff encountered:
    - streaking, yet to determine if it's 16 bits buggy. always in the same latitude, always purple.
    - one small fingertip for man, one big light-bending splotch for Filmkind
    - yeah STOP DOWN, STOP DOWN, STOP DOWN! suddenly my "ok lah" vivitar 19-35mm has CA in the windows, no real sharpness in the image anywhere... LOL, can only say WTF. Will be trying my other lens' shots soon. Watch out for Fuzzy the Falcon and Variance the Vulture portraits.
    - speed is not really the issue, it's the response time of the scanner+interface. Never TWAIN in PS, waste time. Scan all in one shot THEN PS one by one, cos Adobe sells more RAM than Microsoft.

    good stuff:
    - reala good, anything 400 bad. you wanna continuous tone and exposure latitude, go reala. 100% and still no grain.
    - if ppl are letting go of the Dual II, grab. the tonality (graduations) from reala is real A.
    - ICE not impt. erm well erm... I used the polaroid de-spotter s/w I mentioned somewhere else. not bad it actually killed like 80-90% of the small noise. streaks and wormy scratches are my leftover probs currently. use Lay-on-Hands +4. oops I mean Healing Brush .

    once I get comfy I'll post some links, if no protests.

    need help: how to correct fluorescent again? the prints were ok, but it's really irritating if I have it on digital and uncorrected.
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default Re: My First Filmscanner...

    Originally posted by denizenx
    so I got the Dual II from CatzManz instead of a fiscal injection into the economy.
    scanned about 24 times using various settings. Non-exhaustive, yet highly exhausting.
    finally realised what WORKFLOW means.
    std stuff encountered:
    - streaking, yet to determine if it's 16 bits buggy. always in the same latitude, always purple.
    - one small fingertip for man, one big light-bending splotch for Filmkind
    - yeah STOP DOWN, STOP DOWN, STOP DOWN! suddenly my "ok lah" vivitar 19-35mm has CA in the windows, no real sharpness in the image anywhere... LOL, can only say WTF. Will be trying my other lens' shots soon. Watch out for Fuzzy the Falcon and Variance the Vulture portraits.
    - speed is not really the issue, it's the response time of the scanner+interface. Never TWAIN in PS, waste time. Scan all in one shot THEN PS one by one, cos Adobe sells more RAM than Microsoft.

    good stuff:
    - reala good, anything 400 bad. you wanna continuous tone and exposure latitude, go reala. 100% and still no grain.
    - if ppl are letting go of the Dual II, grab. the tonality (graduations) from reala is real A.
    - ICE not impt. erm well erm... I used the polaroid de-spotter s/w I mentioned somewhere else. not bad it actually killed like 80-90% of the small noise. streaks and wormy scratches are my leftover probs currently. use Lay-on-Hands +4. oops I mean Healing Brush .

    once I get comfy I'll post some links, if no protests.

    need help: how to correct fluorescent again? the prints were ok, but it's really irritating if I have it on digital and uncorrected.
    Correcting floursecent : Easy. Use PhotoShop 7 Image->Adjust->Auto Colours. Gets you very close to being corrected. In many instances, it's just about perfect.

    Unless batch scanning, I'd prefer to TWAIN to PS. Saves me one step and I get to tweak BEFORE saving, which is advantageous if you don't save to TIFF and prefer to save to JPG.

    Scans ALWAYS look soft. A touch of USM usually brings out all the sharpness.

    Above 400 bad? Nah. I've scanned Press 800 and it's still very good, almost no grain. Your exposure is important. Underexposure = grain. If using Max 400, throw it away. Don't waste your time.

    Don't need to scan in16-bit mode unless you need to do some SERIOUS tweaking. 8-bit is enough.

    Regards
    CK

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    hehe thx! back in SG... time to grind some films!
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  4. #4

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •