Scanned Darkroom Prints Look Awful

[IanBarber]

I am wanting to create an online portfolio of my journey into darkroom black and white printing but I seemed to have hit a stumbling block when it comes to scanning the prints with my Epson V800. I have tried Epson Scan, VueScan and Silverfast AI.

The final scan does not look like the print in my hand, the digital reproduction looks lower in contrast. If I was to put these in my portfolio, they would look much worse than than they probably are.

The prints are printed onto Ilford MG RC Pearl.
Has anyone else experienced this.

[Jac@stafford.net]

This is not helpful, but a 'me too' post.

When my scanner finally blinked out, I quit scanning B&W darkroom prints because I could not get them right, and I am good with Photoshop with years of experience in the full time job. Now retired.

So I will be reading here and learning up.

[IanBarber]

This is not helpful, but a 'me too' post.

When my scanner finally blinked out, I quit scanning B&W darkroom prints because I could not get them right, and I am good with Photoshop with years of experience in the full time job. Now retired.

So I will be reading here and learning up.

Like yourself, I have many years of Photoshop experience and yes, I could spend time correcting the poor scanned prints but to me thats defeating the object. It would be nice to just be able to reproduce whats been placed under the scanner lid

[Pieter]

This is not helpful, but a 'me too' post.

When my scanner finally blinked out, I quit scanning B&W darkroom prints because I could not get them right, and I am good with Photoshop with years of experience in the full time job. Now retired.

So I will be reading here and learning up.

I usually can reasonably improve my scans in PhotoShop with the levels adjustment. A bigger problem for me is the amount of dust the scanner picks up. And the scans don't look quite as sharp as the prints.

[Christopher Barrett]

Have you guys thought of digitally photographing the prints instead? It involves a bit of setup and you have to light properly, but once you have everything in place, you can work faster than scanning and also digitize larger prints.

[John Olsen]

I am wanting to create an online portfolio of my journey into darkroom black and white printing but I seemed to have hit a stumbling block when it comes to scanning the prints with my Epson V800. I have tried Epson Scan, VueScan and Silverfast AI.

The final scan does not look like the print in my hand, the digital reproduction looks lower in contrast. If I was to put these in my portfolio, they would look much worse than than they probably are.

The prints are printed onto Ilford MG RC Pearl.
Has anyone else experienced this.

I wonder if some of this is from the pearl surface that you're using.

I use an Epson xp-950 scanner for my Ilford MGIV "Classic" glossy prints and really like the results.

Just in case there's a methodology difference, here's what I do: I'm scanning at 400 dpi, 8 bit grayscale on 8x10 prints. I usually do a small adjustment in the histogram based on the preview scan to soften the shadows. After opening the file with Photoshop I adjust with levels and add about 20% sharpening. Then I spot out the dust and lint marks. Sometimes I'll do a "clarity" adjust in Lightroom before the PS sharpening to avoid getting too many hot pixels. I'm just using the software with the XP-950, not anything special.

[John Olsen]

I should have linked a scanned photo to go with my process description:

[IMG]f10b LFF by John Olsen, on Flickr[/IMG]

[faberryman]

I wonder if some of this is from the pearl surface that you're using.

I second this observation, and join the chorus suggesting you digitally photograph your prints rather than scanning them to minimize the paper's texture.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I second this observation, and join the chorus suggesting you digitally photograph your prints rather than scanning them to minimize the paper's texture.

I print on glossy paper air-dried mat finish. I wonder if there is something in the paper, or resin that effects the outcome, possibly brighteners. ??

[Mamu]

I've been doing traditional photography since '89 but have only been scanning a few months. From what I've seen so far, if you are comfortable with post processing, sharpening (softly multiple times preferably) might work. If you're more comfortable shooting, then a copy setup might be the better option. I find that I'm having to do a lot more sharpening than I'd anticipated getting into this to get results that represented the silver gelatin print to my satisfaction. You will need to print on glossy paper to avoid picking up the surface texture of the paper. With the right sharpening and level adjustments, the texture should be okay though if that's not an option.