Scanning 4x5 with Imacon 646 - disappointed..

[oistein]

Hi,

My first post here. I hope some of you guys can comment on this.

Have I done something wrong or is this as expected? Fujifilm Pro 160S scanned at 2040ppi using the canned Pro 160 profile that comes with Flex Color. Take a look at the transitions from shadow (just below her hair) to the lighter skin tones on her forehead. Looks horrible to me. Is this a property of the film or is caused by the scanning process? Any comments on how to get smooth transitions? As you can see there is a colour cast, so the profile doesn't seem to do the job - I thought it would be ok to do the rest of the colour editing in Photoshop instead of in the scanner software. Is that a good strategy?

Thanks for your input!

[Jeremy Moore]

What do you have the sharpening set to? The Imacon's aggressive sharpening can cause noise in shadow areas from my experience.

[oistein]

Thanks for your quick reply, Jeremy. The sharpening was set to 100 (I understand that 1000 is max).

[Brian K]

100 is still aggressive sharpening. No sharpening requires a value of -120 (minus).

[J. Gilbert Plantinga]

Yes, 100 is way too much sharpening! Counterintuitively, to turn the sharpening off altogether you leave it checked on and set the amount at -120 (the range goes down to -200 which will actually soften the image). I shoot Portra 160 NC and usually set the sharpening to somewhere between -60 and 0; it depends on the image.

Regarding the color cast, the Imacon negative setups (they are not profiles per se) don't work very well, but you can make your own very easily. A good method is here:

http://www.michaelfoxphoto.com/Resources/tech_papers/imacon_neg_setup.html

Hope this helps,

[john collins]

For some reason, Imacon scanner software will sharpen the image until a setting of -120 is used. I read an article by John Paul Caponigro (online about 5 years ago) that gave this piece of information and it works well.

[oistein]

Wow thanks a lot for your input! I will definitely keep this in mind next time.

JGP, thanks for the link, I will have a look at it!

I have been shooting with digital over the last 6-7 years so another factor might be that I am so used to looking at "clean" digital files.. anyway I thought 4x5 should produce very smooth images packed with detail and little grain. But I guess I am seeing bad sharpening and not grain here?

[john collins]

Thanks for the michaelfoxphoto link, Gilbert.

[Larry Menzin]

The negative looks underexposed. Underexposed negative film scans poorly.

[Jrewt]

I have to second the underexposure point. Having underexposed Pro S a number of times, having been new to C41 and processing, I can also second that it scans like garbage when underexposed. Wish I had and imacon though, would be a nice addition to my bidness =)

[oistein]

Larry and Jrewt,

Thanks for your input. I think you have a good point here. It seems like I can narrow the cause of the disappointment down to three main issues based on the feedback from all of you:

1. Too high sharpening during the scanning process (Flex Color)
2. Canned profile not good enough
3. Underexposed negative

If anyone else has any comments, I'd be glad to hear!