On 12/16/2011 1:51 PM, Joel Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011, at 03:13 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> ... I'm scanning it with Vuescan. Hamrick allows the software to be
>> installed on up to four computers. My $40 purchase years ago (prior to the
>> price hike) remains such an incredible value.
Yes indeed! I did the same thing, way back when.
> I've got to remember to open it on my new PC to make sure it works. When I
> get back to it, I think I'm just going to
> try scanning RAW as I won't be at the machine I want to work the files on.
> It's funny, I've never done mere RAW scans
> in the past with Vuescan.
That's my usual work flow when doing more than a couple of frames. I batch scan
everything into RAW files. It's just
simple mechanical work that requires no thought. For anything but silver based
B&W and Kodachrome, I have it do the
second hardware IR scan, for later dust removal. The film can then get put away.
I can then process the RAW files in VS just as though I were physically
scanning each one. But when I get a result that
isn't what I like, a rescan is very quick and doesn't involve a physical rescan.
I then keep the RAW files for a while, until I'm pretty sure I've done all I
with to with the image. They are not small.
:-)
On 12/16/2011 2:55 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I always note uppercase RAW since it grates on my nerves. :-) But
> VueScan raw is not quite the same thing as a camera raw file. VueScan
> raw is simply a TIFF file. See:<http://www.openraw.org/node/1546/>
Yes and No. Yes, they are simply TIFF files. Yet they have certain
characteristics we usually associate with camera
Raw/RAW files. They have had no software processing applied. I think about the
only VS settings that are applied to them
are the hardware exposure setting and the scanning resolution.
They are like an intermediate step between physical scanning and processing the
scan. They look very dark because they
are still in linear luminance mapping, before gamma is applied. One may open
them in PS and apply whatever gamma one
wishes, then go ahead from there, skipping VS processing completely. That also
bypasses IR dust removal, though. I think
it's actually is more time consuming than using VS to generate ordinary TIFFs
from them, especially to apply white and
black point, film profiles, etc.
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|