My quandry at a new stage . . .

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

Well I finally got my Epson 2400 up and running Embarassed

, better late than never, eh?

I've got a couple questions . . .
As reference my stepson quoted Ansel Adams - -"The negative is comparable to the composer's score and the print to its performance. Each performance differs in subtle ways." This said - as scanning negatives is like doing your own enlargements, how much "tweaking" is okay? Or as its you making a "print" - it becomes a moot point?

I have also scanned the prints - a comparison of sorts - some of their results are a ways off - Is this just an issue of practice.

Here are the practice results, these were taken during our photo excursion using my PLC2 with 135mm Steinheil . . .
Scanned print . . .

Scanned neg . . .

Scanned print . . .

Scanned neg . . .

Scanned print . . .

Scanned neg . . .

Any thoughts are appreciated,
Jim

LucisPictor · Expire: 2013-12-03

Scanning the negs will deliver much more details, that's for sure.

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

Yes, I agree. I only scan prints when I cannot get the negatives...

Jes.

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Me too, always negs, as long as the scanning software corrects the colour cast properly. My old Agfa scanner couldn't do it but the correction in your pics looks very good.

I think tweaking is perfectly acceptable to get the best picture. After all, automated printing machines in labs are programmed to make adjustments to achieve the best pic possible, and I think your own tweaks have got even better results. Maybe these aren't the best negs for practising with, though.

lulalake · Expire: 2011-11-18

J.,

There are several issues concerning flatbed scanners that I wish to discuss and I wish to alert anyone who scans with flatbeds to these issue.

The main issues are setting the film holder to the perfect height off the glass then masking off the light leaks for much more accurate contrast and finally, film flatness.

Film holder height:

Most flatbeds have a fixed focus lens and are unable to adjust the focal plane (unlike many dedicated 35mm scanners that can do this) so it's important to consider moving the film holder up or down and testing to find the proper film holder height.

This can be done by inserting shims of equal thickness under the holder, scan, and test the scan for sharpness or by the much easier method of purchasing a variable height film holder seen here.

http://www.betterscanning.com/

This site is full of information about film holder issues it's excellent. I've had one of the adjustable holders for a couple of years and it really works! I highly recommend the investment in one of these beauties.

Masking off the light leaks at the edges of the film holder and masking off the unused slot/s where there are no negs will improve your contrast quite noticeably. I use black paper, works fine.

Film flatness. I use the anti-Newton Ring glass inserts that come from the site listed above to flatten negs in the holder. Works perfect.

Those three issues when addressed will make your scans almost as good as one can get without wet mounting which is another subject.

Cheers

Jules

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

@Jules . . .
There seems to be no links for my scanner, but I will see what tricks may apply . . .

@peterqd . . .
Thanks, these are my first 3 attempts, Epson's software seems fairly intuitive, as for whether they're the best negatives, I need to work with the images I would like to finally be able to share Smile

lulalake · Expire: 2011-11-18

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

A reflection print has a lower Dmax so tones from moderately dark greys to blacks all come out at much the same level. There is also surface scatter from the texture of the paper, and reflection if the paper is glossy. All reduce the effective contrast of a scanned print compared to a scanned negative. (this is clearly seen in the shot through trees, where all the detail of what is behind the trees has gone; and in the sunset, where the distant land mass is gone).

A negative has a higher dynamic range and will give better detail. However the scanner software has to know how to convert the colours in the negative to the correct ones (which means it needs to know the make and model of the film and the process used) while for a print, the colours are hopefully close to correct. (This is shown by the brick wall which is the wrong colour, and the sunset which is desaturated, perhaps due your scanner software attempting to auto-white-balance it.

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

@Chris
I think I understand what your saying, and the things I have to consider. I will look into whether the software of the Epson 2400 adjusts for the actual film type/brand. (I don't think it came to mind Embarassed

)

The sunset was one of the things that was making me shake my head - I'll have to go through the settings when I attempt it again.

Just a final note - the building isn't brick. Its wood siding painted burgundy and showing its age Laughing

I guess I need to work on resolution.

Thanks for the input guys.

Jim

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Jim, don't worry about which film or development process you're scanning. There's no way to tell the software, and it corrects the colour cast automatically. As I said earlier, your scanner made a pretty good job of correcting the two pics you posted.

In case you haven't done it already, it's a good idea to download and install the latest driver for your scanner from Epson support. You can also get the manual as well.

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

Thanks, I've just downloaded the files from Epson, I'll get around to the install and tryout asap.

Though from my limited graphics background I will try to block out excess light, etc (just common sense, as I need to put together the current tech self with the photog student in darkroom of 25+ years ago Laughing

)

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

Not bad at all for first scans! There's a good UK site that walks you through a virtual scanning procedure, I'll try to find it for you. Oh...and Happy Birthday! How did everyone know it was your birthday though, I didn't see you post any information unless I just missed it completely.

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

@Larry

& Thanks!
I guess I was too subtle when I started the "oh-no-another-deep-thread" thread. Smile

Thanks for the compliment! Now I'm going to ask you as a regular scanner user and submitter - what do you find are the limits of tweaking?
&
Have you found an issue of negative height and/or "light bleed" to have been issues when you scanned with the 2450 (that is the one you used before?).

Laurence · Expire: 2016-06-19

j.lukow · Expire: 2021-11-25

Here's an update guys . . .
With masking I learned only cover the empty frame spot or the 2400 can't expose the negative Embarassed

These are all done with the new software, I don't know if shimming is necessary. Here are the rescans - the only tweaks I did was to adjust brightness and contrast . . .
#1 - no shim, no mask, and tonal adjustment of open shadow

#2 - no shim, no mask, and no tonal adjustment

#3 - shims and mask, and tonal adjustment of open shadow

#4 - shims and mask, and no tonal adjustment

Now personally I don't see much difference in sharpness ( Confused

), now as per colour I think I should watch the use of the open shadow tone adjustment control.

Could Epson have noted some of this stuff for when the new software came out.