sf
Veteran
kaiyen said:
underexpose, over develop.
kaiyen
local man of mystery
George,
No offense, but you have it totally backwards. Underexposing and overdeveloping would give you anything but flat negatives, and would give you extreme dmax. In other words, you would have very high contrast.
It's called "pushing," in case you haven't heard of it
allan
No offense, but you have it totally backwards. Underexposing and overdeveloping would give you anything but flat negatives, and would give you extreme dmax. In other words, you would have very high contrast.
It's called "pushing," in case you haven't heard of it
allan
Buze
Established
Remember that the more correction you do in photoshop (levels & curves) the more grain/banding you will trigger. Corrections like these multiply the grain/noise by the amount of correction you apply. So it can become fierce, very quickly. A low contrast image can very quickly become totaly unuseable if you try to "force" it to much.
One way to "help" that is to oversample the scanning : ie scan at the highest optical resolution of the scanner, and downsample after you have applied your corrections in 16 bits mode in PS.
But that won't solve all the problem; idealy you need to have a "close enough" contrast on the negative, do a "close enough" scan of it, apply the minimum amount of level/curve in PS...This will give you the smallest amount of artifacts...
Easier said than done !
One way to "help" that is to oversample the scanning : ie scan at the highest optical resolution of the scanner, and downsample after you have applied your corrections in 16 bits mode in PS.
But that won't solve all the problem; idealy you need to have a "close enough" contrast on the negative, do a "close enough" scan of it, apply the minimum amount of level/curve in PS...This will give you the smallest amount of artifacts...
Easier said than done !