Nirmal Hasan |
|
Quality of pictures scanned from negatives
I recently purchased a relatively inexpensive scanner with the intent of digitally archiving some of my better pictures.I am finding that the raw scan from a negative (color or b&w) appears extremely washed out almost every single time. Adjusting the brightness of midtones, shadows and highlights and sometimes color correcting the image using the scanning software (at scan and post-scan) makes the image appear like it does on print. The lab insists that they did no corrections during the development and printing process per my request. While the resulting scanned images end up being perfectly fine, in the spirit of being a "film purist", I am reluctant to digitally enhance my pictures, if that is indeed what I am doing. I can think of the following possibilities: 1. My exposures are way off and the lab is correcting for it. Eminently possible, but lately I have been using a gray card to set exposures.
2. My camera's light meter's calibration is off and the lab is correcting for it.
3. Serves me right for skimping on the bucks when buying a scanner. I am using an HP scanjet 3670 equipped with an adapter for negatives.
4. The lab's processing is at fault. Unlikely since I have this problem with negatives processed at several different labs. I am including a couple of pictures as examples. Any help regarding this would be much appreciated. Thanks
May 25, 2004
|
|
|
Peter K. Burian |
|
Nirmal: The most difficult task for a scanner is negative scanning. Many low end scanners simply do a poor job. I have never tested the 3760 so cannot say what the problem is. <> If the scanner software CAN correct the problem, then you really don't have much of a problem.With any scanner, some adjustments are required for the optimal results. With your scanner, the adjustments are simply much greater than with other machines that I have tested. Cheers! Peter Burian
May 25, 2004
|
|
|
Bob Cammarata |
|
As a "film purist",... there is nothing wrong with correcting a scanned image to match the quality of your print. As Peter mentioned, some adjustments are always required during the transfer to digital. A dedicated film scanner will do a much better job at maintaining the quality of the original negative than an adapted flat-bed scanner.
May 25, 2004
|
|
|
Nirmal Hasan |
|
Peter, Bob, Thank you both for your responses. Makes me feel a whole lot better...
May 26, 2004
|
|
|
Peter K. Burian |
|
|
|
|
|
Flash Photo; Civil War Re-Enactor
Peter K. Burian
|
|
|
|
Nirmal: This is a scan from film. Using a 2800dpi Minolta Film scanner. Would a raw scan have looked this good? Nope; I had to work with the scanner software tools and then enhance the image in Photoshop. Par for the course. Cheers! Peter Burian
May 26, 2004
|
|
|
Andy Fay |
|
I have the CanoScan fs4000 us..I hope it's worht the money I paid, but I have been able to get quaility scans, Some slides come out good, but I realy want the best quaility, scans of my black and white negs, and I hurd you say some thing about soft ware, adjustments? Well, if you could help any thing would thanks!
May 25, 2005
|
|
|
|
Log in to respond or ask your own question.
|
