johnny.moped
Established
Hi, I am really having difficulties in scanning Fuji Superia Reala with my Nikon V-ED.
Scanning without ICE gives me a lot of these strange orange/pink spots.
it does not look like grain, it looks more like some kind of noise, but with ICE switched on they disappear, so i suggest it can't be noise.
please see attached examples (4000dpi scan from Silverfast).
is there any solution to avoid this?
thanks,
d.
Scanning without ICE gives me a lot of these strange orange/pink spots.
it does not look like grain, it looks more like some kind of noise, but with ICE switched on they disappear, so i suggest it can't be noise.
please see attached examples (4000dpi scan from Silverfast).
is there any solution to avoid this?
thanks,
d.
Attachments
Last edited:
sleepyhead
Well-known
I use a Konica minolta Dimage 5400 scanner and I have not seen the white spots that you have.
Could it be that the film processor somehow covered the film in specks due to old chemicals or impure water, or ???
NICE SHARP LENS you've used! And nice sharp scans!
Could it be that the film processor somehow covered the film in specks due to old chemicals or impure water, or ???
NICE SHARP LENS you've used! And nice sharp scans!
gavinlg
Veteran
If my scans of negative film came out looking that sharp and good at 100% I wouldn't complain. I'd have a celebration party. Hehe.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Hmm, last weekend I did the same, scanning Reala on a Coolscan V.
I found it to be very smooth with little grain. I usually scan with ICE on, but my scans look completely different. They have nothing of the effect you show.
Maybe you have a different batch or possibly processing wasn't up to the job? I had mine done at a local 1hr lab, nothing special.
Btw, pixel peeping is all good and well, but downsized to small prints or webviewing, the pics will still look pretty good. Maybe you can try Neat Image or such to decrease the effect.
But still, I'd expect better from Reala!
I found it to be very smooth with little grain. I usually scan with ICE on, but my scans look completely different. They have nothing of the effect you show.
Maybe you have a different batch or possibly processing wasn't up to the job? I had mine done at a local 1hr lab, nothing special.
Btw, pixel peeping is all good and well, but downsized to small prints or webviewing, the pics will still look pretty good. Maybe you can try Neat Image or such to decrease the effect.
But still, I'd expect better from Reala!
johnny.moped
Established
the second one is from a year ago and from a different processor/lab, but both are fuji reala. and this is not the first time i discovered this strange noise, i'm just not always scanning with such a high resolution and ICE switched off. so i think any processing-related problems can be excluded.
thanks, the first one is a leica 50/1.4 summilux asph and the second one a leica 50/2 summicron. damn sharp those babies.
johnny.moped
Established
would you be so kind and post an example.
scanned without ICE would be great. just to compare.
normally i am not the pixel-peeping guy, i just want to find out what's going wrong here because ICE is not always an option (especially for large landscape-prints with its very fine details).
johnny.moped
Established
apparrently i'm not the only one with this problem:
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum40/57076-fuji-color-negative-grain-reala-100-a.html
this guy has the same problem on a imacon scanner and only with fuji reala. i myself will try some kodak portra-scans tonight.
i'm just hoping i do something wrong because reala is my favorite film.
also it could be this myterious fuji-pepper-grain that here is talked about: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/fuji-pepper.shtml
please help me
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum40/57076-fuji-color-negative-grain-reala-100-a.html
this guy has the same problem on a imacon scanner and only with fuji reala. i myself will try some kodak portra-scans tonight.
i'm just hoping i do something wrong because reala is my favorite film.
also it could be this myterious fuji-pepper-grain that here is talked about: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/fuji-pepper.shtml
please help me
Prosaic
Well-known
Not shooting film?
johnny.moped
Established
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
that is definetely very interesting and thank you very much for raising this issie!!!
This might the the real reason why scanning film produces much noise than expected for any film too, those bubles are really interesting, I have access to electron microscopes and I will try to investigate by my self and keep you informed if I find something...
This might the the real reason why scanning film produces much noise than expected for any film too, those bubles are really interesting, I have access to electron microscopes and I will try to investigate by my self
and keep you informed if I find something...
hans voralberg
Veteran
Investigating film with an electron microscope oO man that's overkill.
To the OP: do you print big enough to make the "noise" a problem ?
To the OP: do you print big enough to make the "noise" a problem ?
johnny.moped
Established
i might have to print very big for an exibition and i wonder how far i can go with my nikon scanner before having to switch to wet-mounted drumscans.
Gaspar
Established
Fine dust??? Maybe embedded as the negative dried up. I have had similar look but not so bad from home developed and bathroom driec.
johnny.moped
Established
definitely no dust! unless every negative (only tried the realas) would have the same amount of dust and i got many...
dfoo
Well-known
This is reala on a coolscan 5000 ED.
The original 100% image is on flickr also (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mnewhook/3252217996/)
The original 100% image is on flickr also (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mnewhook/3252217996/)
johnny.moped
Established
This is reala on a coolscan 5000 ED.
The original 100% image is on flickr also (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mnewhook/3252217996/)
thanks a lot. judging from the dust-spots i assume ICE was switched off?
looks way (!!!) better than my scans.
could you please tell me how you are scanning. software, corrections etc...
thanks
dfoo
Well-known
Yes, I didn't scan this image with Ice. The image was scanned with nikonscan with defaults, except I disabled sharpening.
From looking at your scans, I suspect the emulsion has some crap embedded in it. I have some provia scans here somewhere that show black speckling. I didn't notice it from looking at the slides on a light table, but examining them very closely I can see the garbage. Dirty chemistry is no doubt the cause.
From looking at your scans, I suspect the emulsion has some crap embedded in it. I have some provia scans here somewhere that show black speckling. I didn't notice it from looking at the slides on a light table, but examining them very closely I can see the garbage. Dirty chemistry is no doubt the cause.
johnny.moped
Established
GEM switched on?
dfoo
Well-known
No, GEM was disabled. I never use those software corrections.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
Reala is my favorite film, and is a little grainy for my taste, but acceptable. My last scans are instead quite similar to yours (Minolta 5400 no correction), much more grainy than usual.
I am so desperate that I am thinking to return to BW and start digital.
To see that I am not the only one with the problem is a little consolation, at least I tend to exclude me and the scanner.
I would rather blame the lab. On the other hand there are so few here in Rome that I don't see any solution to the problem.
All the best
I am so desperate that I am thinking to return to BW and start digital.
To see that I am not the only one with the problem is a little consolation, at least I tend to exclude me and the scanner.
I would rather blame the lab. On the other hand there are so few here in Rome that I don't see any solution to the problem.
All the best