khen lim wrote:
> On 02/07/07, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Moose makes an important point here. A properly scanned image will have
>> rather low contrast and look rather flat. It's up to post processing to
>> give it some snap.
>>
Here's an example.
http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Scan/Scan6x7/Tootle.htm
I could have given it more contrast, etc. in the scanner driver, but I
wanted to use LCE for that, as I've found it does a much better job of
bringing up visible detail - at the same time as overall contrast - than
a simple contrast adjustment or curves.
>
>
> Actually Chuck, from normal view, the image looks a bit underexposed. It's a
> weatherboard Java-architecture house and the wood panels look darkish.
>
That may well be an advantage for scanning, as long as important shadow
detail isn't lost. From my perspective, the intention in scanning is to
adjust brightness and contrast to get the whole range of tonal values
spread over almost all of the histogram. I want to capture everything on
the print and save it on disk. After that, the print goes back in the
album, never to be troubled again. Then comes the adjustment to a copy
of the digital image.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|