Along the lines of a DIY DSLR scanning setup, is there a viable DIY PMD scanner?
Is PMD hardware fundamentally obsolete technology, and no longer available, new, at any cost/price?
Along the lines of a DIY DSLR scanning setup, is there a viable DIY PMD scanner?
Is PMD hardware fundamentally obsolete technology, and no longer available, new, at any cost/price?
Okay,
Here is my interpretation of the image I previously uploaded. I need to step back a bit and come back to it and see if I still like it this way. But so far I do. The first image is no sharpening at all, the second image is a high pass with pixel radius set to 2 (the high pass layer was desaturated and layer blending set to 100 to 155. Scanned with Epson V850 as linear raw tiff, converted with Colorperfect and processed in Photoshop. For this image I used the scan made with Silverfast
No Sharpening
High Pass Sharpening
Steven, this is a very good interpretation. Best is that it shows very well volumes with an amazing depth.
I've also played with this image, in my edition I worked more the skies, the 16 bits allows to recover a lot of detail in the highlights if wanting that, of course.
Very true on high lights. When I revisit the image I may decide on working sky more.
Thank you.
Post up your interpretation. Be a good study on different artistic interpretations.
Steve, I tried to edit your photos. But they are so under-exposed. Did you see the histogram? Everything is on one side and most of it is clipped. Even if multi scans work, and I have my doubts, you need to start with a fairly normal exposed photo. Also I was having trouble getting rid of the orange mask.
Flickr Home Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums
That's entirely normal, from a raw scan, where the data has not been gamma encoded. Normally a raw scan is not what you want unless you are using a tool that works with a raw scan as input or you already know what your doing.Originally Posted by Alan Klein
A histogram on a editing program or camera show gamma encoded values not true luminosity values, that is why 18percent gray is shown in the middle of the scale not 18 percent in from the left
In Photoshop, go to image>adjustments/exposure then change gamma correction from 1 to 2.2. The images I posted above are from those very negatives you have downloaded, I just used the full size negative. I never allow the scanner software to be used to convert my negatives unless nothing else works and it is close. Additionally, I want all of my archive image files to be raw files, ie, zero manipulation of anything, just the "raw" data. Once you convert the scanned image with scanner software, you bake a formula into the image that almost always cannot be corrected or changed so your editing is limited. Especially, if like I do, I get an image adjusted I like, I post it, then step away from it for a while and come back to it and evaluate it. If I like it still, I am done. If not, I can unbake any part of the formula all the way back to the original unadulterated file.
At least that is my methodolgy.
Just with a few clicks in Ps it shows there is much more detail in the highlights, only possible from the 16bit/ch image...
That is pretty good. I like the gold coming out in sunlight. This is one reason I like to step away and come back for final edits. You get too wrapped up in your own image and can lose sight of it and miss stuff.Just with a few clicks in Ps it shows there is much more detail in the highlights, only possible from the 16bit/ch image...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks