1. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The two photos below are frames 6 and 7 from a negative, scanned at the same time using the the same settings. As far as I can tell from squinting at the negative with a variety of magnifying devices in the first is OK on the film. The scanner is an Epson V550 and these are both straight out of the scanner, converted from TIFF to JPEG scanned at 6400 DPI

    Image00001.jpg
    Image00002.jpg
     
  2. kendo1

    kendo1

    Messages:
    6,685
    Name:
    Ken
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mr Blobby attacks.
    I get that sometimes with my 550
     
  3. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    OK at least it's not something I did. it's a wonder they don't advertise it as a fancy filter effect :)
     
  4. excalibur2

    excalibur2 Loretta

    Messages:
    9,068
    Name:
    Brian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Just an observation:- 6400dpi is too high unless you want a large print or cropping.....for the V550 after about 1,800 it's just packing more pixels\sq cm and not sqeezing more detail out of the neg. For 35mm 3,200dpi is a good all rounder, but some are happy with 2,400dpi.
     
    sirch likes this.
  5. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    9,915
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Is that Arnside?
    If so how widespread is the snow up that way?
     
  6. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yes, it's raining now so the snow is going but we had about 1 or two inches this morning
     
  7. mickledore

    mickledore

    Messages:
    9,915
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Oh well, that's another plan gone. All we've had all day is rain and wind. It's not so much that the light is flat as that there is no light.
    It's enough to drive a man to drink:beer:
     
    sirch likes this.
  8. kendo1

    kendo1

    Messages:
    6,685
    Name:
    Ken
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Good time of year for that :)
     
  9. Nod

    Nod Kronus

    Messages:
    30,038
    Name:
    Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Is any sort of dust removal going on? IIRC, it can play hell with B&W scans. (Software removal rather than blower brush!)
     
  10. joxby

    joxby

    Messages:
    8,168
    Name:
    John
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Know what that reminds me of....

    ...insufficient fix

    why frames next to each other would suffer so differently, is hard to say.
    s'pose you could re-scan 6..:)
     
  11. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I did have software dust removal turned on in the scanning software, I'll try with it off next time
     
  12. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Certainly can re-scan, I'll probably try it tomorrow
     
  13. dmb

    dmb

    Messages:
    1,099
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    That would cause problems with normal silver based monochrome film as it depends on dust blocking the infrared scan, silver blocks infrared very well. Chromogenic monochrome film like XP2 has no silver left in it only dye clouds.
     
  14. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks, good to know.
     
  15. ChrisR

    ChrisR

    Messages:
    8,059
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    If you mean the blotchiness round the fine branches in pic 1, then this does seem to me to be typical of what software dust removal (or infra-red based dust removal) can do. The simple rule is, sadly, never scan silver-based black and white (or Kodachrome) film with dust removal. If you use Silverfast, it has some masking techniques that would allow you to apply it only to sky areas where it can work quite well, but detail confuses it and attempts at "repair" can be catastrophic!

    The second one has worked better but still has some issues in the more distant trees. However, I could be seeing something different from everyone else!

    I'd say re-scan with dust removal off.
     
  16. PeterSpencer

    PeterSpencer

    Messages:
    59
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Epson Scan seems always to switch on the default sharpening which can be very offensive. Could that be the problem? I always try to switch the automatic sharpening off. I even tried to alter the registry setting for sharpening but the software switches it back on.
     
  17. PeterSpencer

    PeterSpencer

    Messages:
    59
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Actually, re-reading the post, it does look like dust removal stuff. I've had worse, to the point that it looks quite creative.
     
    ChrisR likes this.
  18. sirch

    sirch Official Forum Numpty 2015

    Messages:
    6,451
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks all, I re-scanned with dust removal turned off and it came out a lot better (well at least in some respects - at least it proves the dust removal works :D)

    . Image00001.jpg
     
  19. shapeshifter

    shapeshifter

    Messages:
    1,083
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    An observation scanning shows up the grain really bad in comparison to using an enlarger.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice