How do you scan and how well does it work?

I use an Epson V700 flatbed, and the standard EpsonScan software - the s/w seems to me to produce pretty good results, even though some people here seem to think that is impossible. It also has the advantage of being able to scan up to 24 negatives (or 12 slides) at a time - if you shoot a lot it can be a real pain to have to scan each frame individually.

Most of my photos aren't especially good artistically (and even most of the "good" ones don't go any further than being stuck on my web site), so by default I scan everything to 100% jpeg. For any pics that need much tweaking, and for ones that I want to print, I go back and made individual TIFF scans.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I have a Nikon LS-8000ED. Its been replaced by the 9000, but they're very similar. I love it. I scan both 35mm and medium format film with it. It is time consuming, and the scans do require photoshop work to make them perfect (they typically need contrast increased, especially scans from negs, which are very flat till you work the levels and curves in photoshop). This isn't a bad thing, it means that, with negs, you can scan really contrasty film and still pull a good print from it.

bahai1.jpg


trees-toned.jpg


red-chairs.jpg


shegan.jpg


All of these are scans from 35mm film done on my Nikon scanner. The black & white ones are from black & white negs, the color ones are from slides.
Click to expand...

Chris,

These are very good photos. I wonder how you do it.

I have a 8000ED which I bought 2.hand for a small fortune a few years back. I even bought a new glass negative holder - an additional small fortune. I have scanned both MF and 135 negative color film with it, with mixed result. My experience is that it is steep learning curve to use it properly. And a lot of time. Of which I have all too little of.

The challange is to get the sharp negatives to look sharp as a digital file. Say, for internet use.

Could you be a bit more detailed in describing exactly what you do to make them look sharp?
 
sojournerphoto said:
I wondered (as I no longer have either space or equipment for a wet darkroom) how people are scanning for digital output, and what sort of quality can be achieved using different sorts of kit. I suppose my easy options are either epson flatbed (4990, v700 or 750 or a nikon ls V)
Click to expand...

I use a K-M SD IV, which is an orphan product, so I'm not gonna try to convince you to do things my way with my brand. :)

The scans from this machine totally blow away the lab scans as far as quality and clarity!

My suggestion is to pay attention to detail all the way through the process. Scan at maximum resolution and downsize as needed. Make sure the machine and negative are clean. Use the scanner and scanner software to scan and nothing else, clean up, resize, etc. using Photoshop or your favorite other program.

I have made some stunning 13x19 prints from 35mm on scans from this machine.
 
Ronald_H said:
Lots of experience here.

Infrared dust removal is nice, but won't work at all with silver based B/W films and costs sharpness with C41 and E6. Expect do do a LOT of dust removal in Photoshop.
Click to expand...

You must have a very dusty environment. Ever since I started using compressed air my scans have no dust. I also find Digital Ice (infrared dust removal) to be excurciatingly slow (45 minutes per 35mm scan vs. 4 minutes), so I almost never use it. Of course, if you've stepped on a neagtive, that's a totally different matter. But for just garden-variety dust removal, Digital Ice is way too slow.

/T
 
sfb_dot_com said:
It slightly annoys me when a question is asked, and people reply with an answer to a different question.
Click to expand...

I agree here, it irks me when I post a topic only to receive answers to an unrelated question. I think this happened to me on more than 50% of my threads....but then again, by commenting on this, it doesn't relate to the OPs question either.
 
Olsen said:
Chris,

These are very good photos. I wonder how you do it.

I have a 8000ED which I bought 2.hand for a small fortune a few years back. I even bought a new glass negative holder - an additional small fortune. I have scanned both MF and 135 negative color film with it, with mixed result. My experience is that it is steep learning curve to use it properly. And a lot of time. Of which I have all too little of.

The challange is to get the sharp negatives to look sharp as a digital file. Say, for internet use.

Could you be a bit more detailed in describing exactly what you do to make them look sharp?
Click to expand...

Thanks Olsen,

I scan them at 4000 DPI, no matter what size I intend to print them, that way I can change my mind later and make larger prints if I want to. I don't use any sharpening in the scan software, nor do I use the levels and curves adjustments. I do all the tonal adjustments in Photoshop, which I think works better and is easier to use. I am using Viewscan software, but Nikon Scan gives the same sharpness. I use Viewscan because the Mac version of Nikon scan crashes constantly and is really slow on my old Powermac G4. ll my scans are done as 16 bit scans. 8 bit scans posterize when applying the fairly large contrast increases that scans from negs need.

If I am scanning slides or black and white negatives, I scan the film as a transparency. The BW neg scans I then invert in photoshop. I can get a bit more tonal range from then negs that way. Color negs I scan as color negatives because the orange mask is too hard to correct for if you scan as a transparency and invert in Photoshop.

After scanning, I open the photo in PS, and do the tonal adjustments for brightness, contrast, and for color photos I adjust color. I use levels and curves adjustment layers for that. I do a lot of dodging and burning using curves adjustment layers too.

To prepare a file for the web, I resize it in photoshop using bicubic resizing. I resize my newer stuff to 72dpi and 640 pixels on the long side of the image. My older stuff, like the last 3 photos I showed, were made smaller because years ago people used lower resolution monitors and 640 pixel wide images were too big. I then sharpen using the smart sharpen filter in Photoshop CS2. My settings for web resolution images are:

Amount is 104%
Radius is 0.1
Remove: Lens Blur
More Accurate is checked, though I see little/no difference one way or the other on that.

After sharpening, I apply a bit of local contrast enhancement to some images using the unsharp mask filter. I do by making a duplicate layer of the background after doing the smart sharpening, then doing the unsharp mask on the duplicate. This lets me adjust the opacity of the contrast enhanced layer to adjust the effect. Some images need the full effect, others less, and some none. My settings for local contrast enhancement using Unsharp Mask are:

Amount is 19%
Radius is 38.4
Threshold is 0

Then as I mentioned before, adjust the opacity of the layer you did the unsharp mask on to get the final look you want. Flatten image and save as a JPEG.

My regimen for printing is similar except that I size the image for 360dpi at whatever output size is needed. The amount of sharpening and local contrast enhancement vary depending on the image and the size it is going to be.

I've had a hard time with color negatives on my scanner too. I think that scanners just don't do well with the orange mask on the film, because I have to screw with the color a lot in Photoshop to get it right. I much prefer transparency film for scanning, it is much less hassle. I have done some good work from color negs, like this shot:

schneck7.jpg


This was Fuji NPS. It looks good but I hate scanning color negatives. I'd almost rather shoot digital (eek!).

These two were Fuji's cheapie amateur 400 film:

dancing3.jpg


appleseed1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks Chris,

I have made a print of your answer and will try follow your advice. But you are abviously much more advanced than me when it comes to using Photoshop. I use an old 5.0 version and I have never tried 'layers', even.

I was soon to find out that the film has to be absolutely flat to make a sharp image. Thus the glass neg holder. What are you using? Any advice on the neg holder issue..?
 
Olsen said:
Thanks Chris,

I have made a print of your answer and will try follow your advice. But you are abviously much more advanced than me when it comes to using Photoshop. I use an old 5.0 version and I have never tried 'layers', even.

I was soon to find out that the film has to be absolutely flat to make a sharp image. Thus the glass neg holder. What are you using? Any advice on the neg holder issue..?
Click to expand...

Olsen,

I'm using the glass rotating carrier. I got it because in the USA the glass carriers are IMPOSSIBLE to get. I managed to find a camera store in a small town an hours drive from the city I live in that had it in stock, when all the big mail order places were backordered for months on them. I really wanted the non-rotating one because it costs less but i like the one i have, it works well. I scan everything with it, even 35mm, because the 35mm carrier that came with the scanner never seems to hold film flat for me.

I think the info I gave you on sharpening and local contrast enhancement will work fine on Photoshop 5. I use CS-2, which has the "Smart Sharpen" filter. This is just an unsharp mask filter that has some additional options. I think if you use the same settings I used to sharpen in with smart sharpen in the Unsharp Mask filter your version has, it should be pretty close. I use Smart Sharpen for sharpening and unsharp mask for local contrast enhancement, but really you could do both with unsharp mask by plugging in the correct numbers for each step. I use two different filters out of habit, not necessity.

I use CS-2 because I do photo and graphics work professionally. It has some features I need, and the raw conversion is nice for the digital cameras I have.

PS-5 does adjustment layers, you should explore that. Layers are cool...you can do a curves or levels adjustment, and it goes on a layer. If you later change your mind, you can delete the layer and the adjustment you did goes away, even after you've saved and closed a file. It's like having unlimited undo ability. Not only that, you can open the curves or levels dialogue box for the layer and change the setting used! If you select something in the photo then make an adjustment layer while the selection is active, the layer only affects the area you select, allowing you to dodge and burn and adjust color on selected areas while still having the ability to remove the layer or change the adjustment you did.
 
Hi

I scan mostly 35mm silver negatives. I believe I have perfected my technique but there's always room for improvement. Here is my workflow

coolscan V
Vuescan
photoshop

I scan RAW DNG, very important with vuescan. 4000 dpi but I bin half of those pixels, meaning I take the best of 4000 to make 2000. This is done with the output tab in Vuescan. The manual recommends this. I also lock exposure based on the film.

I use ACR with photoshop. In ACR I like prophotorgb because it has lots of shadow detail (wider gamut). I crop and rotate in ACR. I have zero sharpening, zero curves (even zero point curves tab). Contrast is controlled with development not with photoshop.

In PS I invert and auto levels, convert to sRGB, then to 8bit, then resize, then smart sharpen for lens and save. I use three different actions for this.

My scans are for web not prints. Printing should be done properly, not digitally if you work in b/w.

This is an example of the what this workflow looks like. I feel it is the most natural digital interpretation of my negatives.
2612253797_49633172e5.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks you

Thanks you

Thank you all for your replies. They are very helpful and much appreciated.

Sadly, I have neither time nor space for a wet darkroom at present, although I was recently offered some kit that's very tempting for a rainy day. The reality is that I'm thoroughly enjoying shooting film in my old Zorki and want to make the best of it, but am trying to avoid buying two scanners - which looks to be the real way forwards - an Nikon 9000 is outside my current budget. I may spring for either a flatbed or an LS V now and save up for the other later.

Thanks again. I'll try to post occasionally as well.

Mike
 
Back to an earlier question in this thread -- does anyone use a dslr in a copying set-up? I'm thinking of at least a dedicated bellows/slide holder and macro or enlarging lens, or maybe one of the Bowens Illumitran type (were v expensive but not now) - would be much quicker for eg slides and in theory (pixels/quality of v good lenses) give equal or better results. When most of the dedicated film scanners were being developed the resolution of dslrs was much lower and the price far higher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom