| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2014 8:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Excalibur wrote:
It's better to have a software fiddle than a low scan of 1600dpi on a cheaper flat bed scanner. Anyway it is more complicated than that as if you scanned to get a 1800 X 1200 pixels on a top class scanner like Fuji frontier or drum scanner which would give about 1-2 mb jpg file (maybe more for the drum scanner) you will get more detail and better quality shot compared to your flatbed scanning for same i.e. 1800 X 1200 pixels jpg file.
The components of a £20,000 scanner are much better at scanning at any dpi so the software fiddle scanning at 3200dpi on a flatbed scanner does help compensating for this difference, but can never equal a top class scanner.
H'mm hope this makes sense to you 
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alaios
Joined: 24 Jan 2014
Posts: 724
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
alaios wrote:
Hi,
it makes sense so I can even stick to 4800 dpi. I do not understand though where you read in the pdf I provided that 1600 is the maximum native resolution.
Regards
A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| alaios wrote: |
Hi,
it makes sense so I can even stick to 4800 dpi. I do not understand though where you read in the pdf I provided that 1600 is the maximum native resolution.
Regards
A |
The link you gave was a recipe for Greek food 
The true dpi of your 4490 scanner might be higher, the top scanners are 3200, 4990, v700 and would think your scanner would not be as good and I would be surprised when Epson brought out the V500 the 4490 would be better, so the V500 is reckoned to have a true dpi of about 1600dpi and that your scanner would be similar....of course my logic might be wrong.
Anyway enjoy your scanning and what you don't know you wont miss and accept (like me) that our home scanning results will never be as good as a very expensive top class scanner.
This is what you need
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.littlefilmlab.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FFuji-Frontier-SP3000.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.littlefilmlab.com%2Ffuji-frontier-sp3000-scanner%2F&h=660&w=527&tbnid=bufP5LenDSMahM%3A&zoom=1&docid=MHkkGiP7JYwTFM&ei=j5ElVIaGLbTY7Aay94DADw&tbm=isch&client=firefox-a&ved=0CCQQMygDMAM&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=1102&page=1&start=0&ndsp=17
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alaios
Joined: 24 Jan 2014
Posts: 724
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alaios wrote:
Hi,
this is the correct link 
https://files.support.epson.com/pdf/pr349p/pr349ppg.pdf
Alex
P.S I am still laughing with my mistake. You can also try the recipe is damn good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
...and I've made a mistake of thinking you had a 4490   But it looks like your 3490 is a cheaper ver of the 3200 so the true dpi of your scanner is probably about 1600 dpi.
With all this dpi confusion I suppose it could be like comparing spec of lenses where a cheap lens would boast six elements etc and a Nikon six elements etc and it all reads that that they are similar, but the difference in results can be shown. So a drum scanner (or similar) scanning at 2000 dpi would give a better result compared to any flatbed scanner also scanning at 2000 dpi. But as in my previous post if you have never owned a Nikon lens or drum scanner, you can use a cheap lens and cheap flatbed scanner and be happy...ignorance is bliss as the saying goes until you read Mflenses forum and then you become unhappy and want better
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alaios
Joined: 24 Jan 2014
Posts: 724
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
alaios wrote:
| philslizzy wrote: |
How did I change your photo? I kept your lab scan as reference then in photoshop I adjusted the colours in 'colour balance' mainly increasing the amount of yellow in medium tones, to give the green a better colour. Then went on to hue/saturation and increased saturation. it took 2 minutes tops. But you have to know your way around a program such as this. |
Hi,
and what would you do if you did not have the reference. If I understand this right you start processing without having specific in mind. You experiment and then you stay in what you like.
I would try to scan at 4800 and then reduce size as needed. (thanks Excalibur)
In the mean time this is my last comparison:
scanning with the film in the negative holder and then by the film sitting directly on the glas. to see if I gain anything in terms of sharpness
Film inside the negative holder:
original size here
http://alexpal.smugmug.com/photos/i-bF2DcQs/0/O/i-bF2DcQs.jpg
Film directly at glass (it is a bit misaligned compared to the above
original size here
http://alexpal.smugmug.com/photos/i-8HZNKRw/0/O/i-8HZNKRw.jpg
Regards
Alex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
You've got Newton rings putting the neg on the glass.....a well known problem and a special glass is used in the neg holder kits you can buy, or make your own. But IMO these kits are more or only? useful when scanning larger negs as it's a problem with Epson holders to get the neg flat as some negs bow in the middle.
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4748
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Curvature of the film actually avoids newtons rings, but doesnt make it sharper. A dedicated neg scanner is the way to go really. But they're hundreds of pound/euros/dollars.
I often don't have a reference when adjusting the colour of a photo, I adjust it until it pleases me. I tried to copy the image from the lab scan that you thought had better colours
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alaios
Joined: 24 Jan 2014
Posts: 724
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2014 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
alaios wrote:
Then that is it guys. My settings are fixed and the scanning process can start.
In any other user would like to know in the future my scanner is a 3490 photo epson. and all settings are unchecked. I would be scanning at 4800 dpi, not directly at the glass but using the negative holder.
More samples come soon (in other threads)
Alex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
philslizzy
Joined: 07 Aug 2012
Posts: 4748
Location: Cheshire, England
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 28, 2014 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
philslizzy wrote:
Hurrah! Go for it!
_________________
Hero in the 'messin-with-cameras-for-the-hell-of-it department'. Official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5019
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2014 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| philslizzy wrote: |
| Hurrah! Go for it! |
Yep..."practice makes perfect".
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
