I think what the low-budget photo printers must do is set the black and
white points of the image well inside their normal settings, losing detail
in highlights and shadows.
The best I could recommend is a lot of sweat continuing to practice working
with levels and curves in Photoshop.
Maris
--
Maris
Agreed on the budget printers. Blown out highlights and no shadow detail.
Still, even comparing my scans to good quality digital cameras like the Nikon 990
leaves me dissapointed when viewing them on screen. My scans are sharper, which is not
surprising given the resolution difference,
You might be interested in downloading the following PDF file,
http://www.ledet.com/margulis/PP6_Chapter2.pdf
Hope it helps, Bob Wright
- Original Message -
From: Jim Sharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 6:12 AM
Subject: filmscanners: Color sat
particulars (it may take a couple of days - I have my regular employment to
attend to).
Maris
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Sharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Color saturation with
Jim: I have a Minolta Scan Elite which I use for scanning color negs... I
don't use VueScan, just the Minolta software, but the way I take my scans
into PShop is the key to my success... I had the same problem with
apparently flat scans as well, until I started to scan the neg directly into
PShop
Thanks to everyone who replied to this!
I downloaded the Margulis .pdf files suggested and will study them
closely. I'm hoping that will help. I also intent to try a few of the
adjustments in Vuescan that I've yet to experiment with.
I'll let you all know how I fare...
--
Jim
Michael
I will try this and see how it works for me. Is it much of a problem
getting rid of the orange mask from the negative?
It also appears I need to buy some books...
--
Jim
Michael Moore wrote:
>
> Jim: I have a Minolta Scan Elite which I use for scanning color negs... I
> don't use Vue
I have had no problem with the orange mask... I guess either the minolta software
strips it it when making the scan (as a 16 bit linear negative scan) or PShop does
it on invert...
Mike M.
Jim Sharp wrote:
> Michael
>
> I will try this and see how it works for me. Is it much of a problem
> gett
Well, Margulis is a can of worms, in my opinion, unless you have a CMYK
workflow. One thing that might help is to set your output to sRGB in
Vuescan. sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when
scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why. Also make sure your
scanner is warmed u
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB when
> scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why.
I believe Vuescan probably still only really works to sRGB internally, so when
you select a wider output spa
Tony writes ...
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB
> > when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why.
>
> I believe Vuescan probably still only really works to
> sRGB internally, so whe
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:30:29 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> If you scan into a variety of color spaces, and
> view them all with PS6, they should all appear the same (PS6 being the
> necessary software, you cannot do all co-existingly with PS5).
The corollary of which is that, scanned
--- shAf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tony writes ...
>
> > On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:31:32 -0800 (PST) Jon
> > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > > sRGB seems to give more saturated image than AdobeRGB
> > > when scanning with Vuescan, although I don't know why.
> >
> > I believe Vuescan prob
Jon
I have been scanning into sRGB. I'll be using these scans on the web
ultimately so I assumed that was the way to go. I also leave the scanner
on all the time so the warmup thing is not an issue.
I haven't looked over Margulis much yet, or had time to try any of the
suggestions people on the
"Jim Sharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been scanning into sRGB. I'll be using these scans on the web
> ultimately so I assumed that was the way to go. I also leave the scanner
> on all the time so the warmup thing is not an issue.
What resolution will you be using on the net? If it's no
Jim, I noticed I get "better looking" results scanning my Kodak Supra
400 with Generic Neg setting. Info posted on another thread indicates
that Vuescan attempts to make all neg films "accurate" to a Kodak
target, which seems to me would make all different types of neg film
look alike. So, you mig
Jon - Thanks
It's one more thing I'll try... This stuff has about *a million* degrees of freedom,
and in the end, I'm still working with something that's subjective. I'm afraid I may
have been a bit too lazy so far. It's not going to work though - the canned solution
isn't going to satisfy m
Jon wrote:
>Jim, I noticed I get "better looking" results scanning my Kodak Supra
400 with Generic Neg setting. Info posted on another thread indicates
that Vuescan attempts to make all neg films "accurate" to a Kodak
target, which seems to me would make all different types of neg film
look alike
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 08:54:15 -0800 (PST) Jon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Jim, I noticed I get "better looking" results scanning my Kodak Supra
> 400 with Generic Neg setting. Info posted on another thread indicates
> that Vuescan attempts to make all neg films "accurate" to a Kodak
> target, wh
19 matches
Mail list logo
