This one does work for me Tina
Other will probably follow
Good luck with the scanning ...
Amitiés
Philippe
Le 14 juin 12 à 15:16, Tina Manley a écrit :
> Thanks, Ken.
>
> I tried Vuescan many, many years ago and could never get a decent
> scan.
> Maybe it's time to try it again? How steep is the learning curve?
> With
> Silverfast, what you get is a 48 bit HDR scan from two exposures.
> This
> gives you a raw file, very dark, which has to be converted in PS or
> Camera
> Raw or Silverfast's own conversion program. Maybe I'm messing up
> with the
> conversion or the post-processing. Here is another Kodachrome scan:
>
> http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/142780231
>
> Do you see the same problems there?
>
> I have already scanned 5000 slides but I have 500,000 to go and
> don't want
> to scan them all but once!!
>
> Tina
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Tina,
>>
>> I'm struggling understanding what is going on with your Kodachrome 64
>> scans. I'm suspecting that we have a combination of issues you are
>> fighting and not realizing that you are fighting. In the Faviana and
>> Remundo photo, we have several issues, but they seem to be universal
>> to some of the other K64 shots too. Here's the observations behind my
>> stating this:
>>
>> 1. Kodachrome is an extremely fine-grained film. It is perfectly
>> capable of a double-truck spread without being much more than a touch
>> sandy. Sometimes, we'd see an interaction between the half-tone
>> screens and the grain, but we didn't get the globular mess that we
>> saw
>> with Ektachrome.
>>
>> 2. The colors tend to have good tonal separation in Kodachrome 64.
>> What I'm seeing is specifically the oranges getting blocked up.
>>
>> 3. The blues are definitely off. If the boy's hair is blue in the
>> slide then I suspect the film suffered from heat or x-ray damage.
>> Meanwhile, the blues desaturated elsewhere. This is evident in the
>> greens which turned olive. (I'm usually used to greens turning bluish
>> gray in Kodachrome). Yet, what I think is a wood stump behind the boy
>> is gray. (Traditional Kodachrome rendering of wood, whereas
>> Fujichromes will turn wood into some shade of tan).
>>
>> 4. The slide does have a slight look that it's been projected and
>> suffered a little bit of damage from that.
>>
>> I supect that your scan came pretty close to the visual examination
>> of
>> the slide when viewed over a NON-color-balanced, full-spectrum
>> viewing
>> table. Unfortunately, if the lightsource behind your viewing table is
>> not full-spectrum, you're going to suffer from misinterpreting the
>> color rendering in the slide. For some reason, from my own
>> experience,
>> Kodachrome is easier to misread than other films. Not in overall
>> tonality, but in how some colors are rendered.
>>
>> The color profile for the scan is off. It may match a color target or
>> even other slides, but this one may have other issues which have
>> caused the profile to be incorrect.
>>
>> The scan has the look that it was underexposed during the scan
>> process
>> and everything was boosted through the profile or level management.
>> You mention that you use Silverfast. I'm not very familiar with that
>> program, but usually use Vuescan for my scans. A side benefit of
>> Vuescan is that Vuescan's IR cleaning algorithm now works on
>> Kodachrome! Anyway, this looks like we're pulling up the exposure of
>> the scan in the computer instead of increasing the exposure time
>> during the scan. Unlike Ektachromes and Fujichromes, which pull up
>> ok,
>> Kodachrome scans more like a B&W film and doesn't handle shadow
>> lifting. If fact, it is almost like trying to work with a digital
>> camera image that has been pulled up 2-3 stops.
>>
>> Judging from the grain pattern and other artifacts, I'm guessing that
>> you are using a 4000dpi Nikon scanner. Mine is a V-ED. The Nikon
>> scanners tend to find grain where there is no grain. It's big on
>> grain
>> aliasing. One way around this is to overscan (multi-pass). This will
>> reduce the scanner's ultimate resolution, but much of that loss can
>> be
>> recovered with care.
>>
>> Which leads me to the next point. I'm seeing some artifacts in the
>> bokeh of the Faviana and Reymundo photo which is a characteristic of
>> the 35/1.4, but is exaggerated by USM sharpening. Earlier, I was
>> mentioning an overscan and multi-pass sharpening method I use on some
>> of my slides. The big problem with the Nikon scanner in single-pass
>> is
>> that we have a slight resolution loss thanks to the scanner's optics,
>> yet we also have the grain aliasing. It seems pretty natural to throw
>> a 2 or 3-pixel USM on the scanned image. What that does with some of
>> the tight bokeh traits of that particular lens is that it makes the
>> bokeh harsh and unnatural. Instead of a nice penumbra, the
>> transitional fade pattern will develop steps.
>>
>> I'm not sure what advice I'd pass on yet. Most of your images in your
>> pbase account have the smoothness I'd expect to see from a K64 slide
>> (especially in the railroad gallery), but these Guatamala slides just
>> aren't quite there. If I were to recommend trying something I'd say
>> to
>> scan "The SC40-2" (Image 964s) again (to achieve identical results of
>> the original scan) and apply those same exact settings to the
>> "Faviana
>> and Reymundo" slide and see what happens.
>>
>> My point in all this is that this particular slide in question did
>> not
>> digitize in a manner that I would ever expect to see from K64. What I
>> did is idenitfy a different image which did digitize in an expected
>> manner and am recommending that you attempt a baseline adjustment
>> with
>> that as a starting point for this slide. It might also turn out off,
>> but at least it would be worth a try as part of the problem
>> identification. I do notice that other images seem to suffer from
>> blues in the shadows, so we might definitely have a profile problem.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> --
>> Ken Norton
>> ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.zone-10.com
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Tina Manley, ASMP
> www.tinamanley.com
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
|