I just realized something. I suck at scanning. I have an epson 4990 for scanning my 4x5 slides. I use vuescan. The thing is, my scans never hardly ever look like they are supposed to: Like the slide. One of my main problems I find is that my scans seem rather darker on the screen than the slide looks. And the colours can be very difficult to reproduce accurately with the right hues and saturation level. What suggestions do you find helpful for getting your scans to work right for you?
Calibrate your monitor.
Color correct by using the numbers in the info window, but by eye.
Calibrate your monitor, as Walter has said. Then profile your printer/ink combination, and learn how to use a tool like Photoshop. Otherwise... the odds are against you.
You can get quite good scans from the 4990, but you have to work at it. Take one image and scan it many times using different settings, to get a feel for which settings are optimal and their effect on the image.
In my experience it is extremely difficult, if not entirely impossible, to get a reproduction of any type to look as good as a transparency on a light table. Its better just not to worry about it and accept the fact your scan (and especially print) is never going to look as wonderful as a slide on the table. That's not to say you can't get damn close, to the point where no one will notice save for a side by side comparison, but you can (and I have) wasted countless hours on a PC trying to get there.
PS. That wasn't helpful at all was it?
I've had the same problems. Compared to when I first started scanning a few months ago, I've found the following steps have led to improved results
1. Profile the scanner for the input medium you are using - I scan 120 film and 5x4 transparencies - I used the IT8 profiling target that came with the scanner to create a profile. Now, this was not a profile for use with Fuji Velvia 50, but it did lead to a noticeable improvement in the scan. - if your scanner did not come with a scan profile you can buy them at http://www.targets.coloraid.de/:
2. When you colour calibrate your scanner you should be abkle to set a 'gamma' setting - this would usually default to 2.2. Its a controversial move, but you could try using a lower setting when doing the CALIBRATION - say 2.0 or 1.8 - however, when actually SCANNING, make sure that the gamma is set back to your default of 2.2 - this produces a boost in midtone brightness in the resulting scan.
3. You could go even further, and set you scanning 'gamma' to an even higher number - I've used 2.4 sometimes, however, the tradeoff above this level seems to be a rapid falloff in contrast.
4. Shoot bracketed exposures and scan the lightest - On 120 film I tend to shoot 3 brackets, my main exposure, and then 1/3rd or 2/3rds above and below (depending on how confident I am). Its a tougher decision on 5x4 due to cost, but I usually shoot at least a second exposure for backup (push processing if required). Then, when it comes to scanning, use the higher bracket tranny - again the tradeoff is a little loss of contrast, but in my experience it usually produces a better scan than the main exposure.
5. As already suggested by another poster, my feeling is that trying to replicate the look and feel of a tranny in a digital file is very difficult, shoot for the best, but accept that at the end of the day the person seeing the print is not always going to be viewing it side by side with the tranny.
6. Checlout the thread in this forum on Silverfast 6.5 Multi-exposure (http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=21732
7. Forget about doing it yourself and send your best trannies off to a pro house for drum scanning.
8. Forget all of the above and prepare to drop multiple thousands of dollars on an Imacon drum scanner.
PS: checkout the link below for a few examples of results achieved with the above approaches - the latest images (Haywheels) are very close to the look of the tranny, while the earlier images (recuvler, Blue Pools) required a lot of post processing from a poor scan.
Hope that's helpful.
Paul
http://www.photoluma.com/index.php?pageId=1000&category=%5BSEARCH_CATEGORY%5D&keyword=lgfmtest01&imageField.x=0&imageField.y=0
Last edited by marschp; 23-Sep-2007 at 02:51. Reason: Added silverfast link
A small crass commercial announcement ... come to one of our scanning workshops. See the details at www.mpex.com (click on the banner).
You've gotten some good advice and the best is to practice. Perhaps the most important is to profile your scanner using an IT8 target. While never packaged with scanners in the US, if you shoot Fuji film you can get Fuji targets instead of the Kodak targets which are the more common . IMO, Silverfast Ai software will give you the est results, next would be the software that comes packaged with your scanner. Vuescan is ok but not as good as the others if you are making a lot of adjustments. YMMV.
Lucas, it looks like you might not be far from New Hampshire where Ted Harris and Michael Mutmansky will be doing a scanning workshop. When I attended one in Albuquerque I brought my own scanner and it was helpful to be using it under Michael's tuteladge (Ted wasn't at this one). While I don't seem to have the aptitude to become a master at it, overall, I found the workshop very helpful and I feel much more confident now when scanning on my Epson 750.
Everybody sucks at scanning when they start out. It's not as simple as it looks, and it's not as simple as pushing a button. Only the people who haven't done it before think it's easy.Originally Posted by Lucas M
Just like using an LF camera, it takes practice to get good at it. If you have the will and the patience, you'll get better. That means practice, practice, practice. And no matter how much you do it, there will always be more to learn, just like with a view camera.
Bruce Watson
Absolutely right.
However, I would add you could also get yourself a better scanner. There are lots of used Howtek 4500's out there. Some nice Digital Photolab software, mounting station and drum. all less than 10K or so.
You would be amazed at the results, and you'd have 20,000 pixels on the 5 inch edge, enough to do a 40 inch print at 500 dpi. Sharp as a razor, edge to edge.
It's not for everyone, but the difference is quite substantial.
Lenny
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks