kwimartin
Member
I am using this scanner to digitise my film but i seem to be able to see the grain even when i use 16x multisample the photos i see on this site look better than i can get results with this scanner, i have had the scanner from new when it first came out but have not used it much due to the results .Anyone having good luck with this scanner?
i am shooting fuji nps 160 velvia and sensia and superior 100 some kodak print film also
i am shooting fuji nps 160 velvia and sensia and superior 100 some kodak print film also
Artorius
Caribbean Traveler
Do you have samples?
Do you have samples?
Something we can see?
Do you have samples?
kwimartin said:
Something we can see?
kwimartin
Member
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Well, at 2700dpi the ls2000 is right about there for grain aliasing. But that's not what you're getting with that color image, since it's dye clouds (I'm assuming c41 negative film?). Do you have sharpening turned on? What software are you using?
allan
allan
kwimartin
Member
settings
settings
i am using nikon scan 1.31 without sharpening bunping the contrast with curves digital ice normal setting and 16x multisampleing, the film was fuji sensia slide film then it was resised and saved for web in photoshop.this image is typical of what the results i get. Would 4000 dpi be even worse ? What do you mean dye clouds?
Martin
settings
i am using nikon scan 1.31 without sharpening bunping the contrast with curves digital ice normal setting and 16x multisampleing, the film was fuji sensia slide film then it was resised and saved for web in photoshop.this image is typical of what the results i get. Would 4000 dpi be even worse ? What do you mean dye clouds?
Martin
kaiyen
local man of mystery
C41 negative color film uses dye clouds - not grain - to produce images. I actually don't know what slide film uses, but I don't think it's technically using grain, either.
Even the resized version isn't really showing the grain that you're talking about. What speed film is it? The 100 or 400?
allan
Even the resized version isn't really showing the grain that you're talking about. What speed film is it? The 100 or 400?
allan
kwimartin
Member
Athena
Well-known
I use a Nikon 5000D scanner and quite pleased with it except for the clunky software.
BTW, your pic seems to either be vignetted at the top - or perhaps you hand "hooded" to top of the lens when you shot the pic?
Here is a scan of a pic taken with my Cosina R2S and Nikkor 5.0cm and scanned by the 5000D scanner.
The original pic was shot with T-Max 400 and scanned into a TIFF file which was dropped down to JPEG (high) for this post.
BTW, your pic seems to either be vignetted at the top - or perhaps you hand "hooded" to top of the lens when you shot the pic?
Here is a scan of a pic taken with my Cosina R2S and Nikkor 5.0cm and scanned by the 5000D scanner.
The original pic was shot with T-Max 400 and scanned into a TIFF file which was dropped down to JPEG (high) for this post.
Attachments
Lonely Driver
Established
I had a Nikon LS2000 and I didn't think very highly of it - I think my results were somewhat similar to yours. I ended up upgrading to a Nikon Coolscan IV and haven't looked back. The plus is, it's not SCSI and it's still WAY faster than the LS2000.
kwimartin
Member
Thanks athena yes my picture is vignetted it is the 15mm cv lens.
It takes me 5 mins to scan because it is at 16x. Have you used multisampling on the 5000 ?
Lonely Driver do you have a sample from your scanner ? and yes i hate the scsi i have to reboot to turn it on if my computer is already on
Martin
It takes me 5 mins to scan because it is at 16x. Have you used multisampling on the 5000 ?
Lonely Driver do you have a sample from your scanner ? and yes i hate the scsi i have to reboot to turn it on if my computer is already on
Martin