Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
> Moose wrote:
>
>> First I gotta ask. Is this image as far out of focus as it appears on my
>> screen? Looks like handheld with a significant bump/jerk between parts
>> of the exposure, or like two layers slightly offset in PS. I can still
>> comment on colors, but am curious about sharpness. It sort of hurts my
>> eyes staring at it closely.
>>
>>
> I asked myself just the same Moose: the Ektachrome is track sharp, and I
> remember having focused with extreme care. I might have go wrong with
> the USM again ... anyway, seems I should start over.
>
If the chrome is sharp, something has gone wrong either in the scanning
process or the PS processing.
> ......
>>> I did add a little blue to the sky, which is way burned out in the 16 bit
>>> .tiff but faintly light blue in the Ektachrome .... fear this 4000ED is not
>>> working as it should.
>>>
>> Probably not the scanner. More likely the software and operator. The
>> loss of subtle sky color sounds like the White Point is set wrong,
>> resulting in unwanted clipping.
>>
> wellllllllllllll, yes: white point was somewhere in the sky area, where
> I found level was the highest. Right now I'm learning that I should have
> selected a *white* pixel - difficult task I guess.
>
I don't know what software you are using. Is there a way to set it
numerically, rather than with a dropper?
>> On the other hand, the shadows could use some judicious combination of
>> multiple scanner passes, increased black point and/or noise reduction.
>>
>>
> Increased black point was done, scanner passes were the most it can do,
Try a single pass scan and look at it at 100% to make sure it isn't
multi-scanning that's causing the odd multiple image looking focus.
>
> noise reduction ... what's that?
>
:-)
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|