Thanks, yes, that's one of the shots I remember.
Chuck Norcutt
Piers Hemy wrote:
> Who me?
>
> Yes, it is well worth trying Kodachrome with the dust removal features of
> Nikon Scan, because I have found them to make a great difference, even
> though at the cost of some colour shift in reds. This was using Nikon Scan
> 3.1 on a 4000-ED (which is identical to a V-ED except for the formers wider
> range of film adapters).
>
> Judge for yourselves:
> http://www.hemy.me.uk/img/P0010.jpg
> http://www.hemy.me.uk/img/P0021.jpg
>
> These are unretouched straight scans from 50 year old Kodachrome
> transparencies - I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide which is
> the before and which is the after. And whether either is preferable to the
> other!
>
> Piers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Norcutt [mailto:chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 06 August 2010 00:03
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] VueScan specs
>
> Sounds like a neat trick. Let us know how it works out. Still hoping to
> hear from Piers on his experience with Nikon scanner and Kodachrome
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Moose wrote:
>> With VueScan, turning IR cleaning on and off and to Light, Med and
>> Heavy is a separate setting, not tied to the film being scanned.
>>
>> I have some modest experience with Kodachrome scanning and IR
>> cleaning.
>>
>> The basic problem is that, like the silver in B&W negs, the dyes in
>> Kodachrome block IR, so the software often can't distinguish the
>> difference between dust and image.
>>
>> I found that VueScan IR cleaning worked pretty well in areas with
>> little dye, i.e. light areas, like sky. Fortunately, those are also
>> the areas most in need of spotting. The black dust specks of scanned
>> slides tend to disappear in darker and busier areas. In dark areas, IR
>> cleaning did produce some noticeable artifacts, although fewer than I
>> expected.
>>
>> Next time I do some Kodachrome, I'm going to scan to 64 bit RGBI "RAW"
>> without applying any other adjustments, including no IR cleaning, just
>> as I usually do. Then I'll "scan"twice from the RAW file for two
>> output files, one with and one without IR cleaning, drop one atop the
>> other in PS as layers, paint a layer mask to get the best of both,
>> then merge.
>>
>> No Spotting Moose
>>
>> On 8/5/2010 1:21 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>>> IR cleaning is turned off under which product and what conditions?
>>>
>>> I would hope that it's possible to get the IR cleaning on with the
>>> Nikon since Piers has shown that his Nikon scanner (model?) was able
>>> to do a fair job of cleanup on Kodachrome with IR enabled. I know IR
>>> is not supposed to work on Kodachrome but Piers showed that it does
>>> to some extent... at least on his scanner model.
>>>
>>> Ken Norton wrote:
>>>> The IR cleaning is turned off. That's it.
>>>>
>>>> AG
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
