Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,502   Posts: 1,543,387   Online: 791
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    darkosaric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Watson View Post
    I agree. Looks like a bad scan, not bad film/exposure/developing.
    I agree. That is good.

    I have canoscan 4400F - I find out that best result I get when I scan B&W prints that I developed. For this case I use 18x24 cm FB paper, when scanned in color mode - it gives warm and nice yellow tone.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    24
    Yeah, scanning film with a flatbad is probably not optimal. But to be honest, I just want something good enough for presentation on the web, and I don't want to spend the time or money making prints.

  3. #23
    darkosaric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,749
    Quote Originally Posted by anjo View Post
    Yeah, scanning film with a flatbad is probably not optimal. But to be honest, I just want something good enough for presentation on the web, and I don't want to spend the time or money making prints.
    For web - any scanner with some editing in photoshop will do. But if you have chance - try to make some prints (if you know somebody with equipment...) - you will not be sorry

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    My screen shows no whites where there should be
    whites. I've flashed print paper to yield the same
    effect. The blacks show well. Dan

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    24
    Yes, it still needs a slight "bump" in Photoshop.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by anjo View Post
    Yeah, scanning film with a flatbad is probably not optimal...
    I like your way of thinking

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,052
    Your example is a bit flat, but that could be caused by a number of things. The point is to get a negative that gives a full tonal range (good blacks and whites) when printed on grade 2 or 3 paper. If you are printing digitally, the histogram should span nearly the entire range before you make adjustments. If you consistently have to print on the higher contrast grades of paper, then your negatives do not have enough contrast, and you should develop them longer.

  8. #28
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by anjo View Post
    Yeah, scanning film with a flatbad is probably not optimal. But to be honest, I just want something good enough for presentation on the web, and I don't want to spend the time or money making prints.
    There are two kinds of flatbed scanners, those that have a single lighr source below the glass, which are lousy for film, and those that have a second light source in the lid or cover, which works better for film. Most of those work well with 35mm, although the enlarging can result in pixelation. Pixelation is an effect that if each pixel is 1μm in size, and is enlarged 1000 times, each pixel will appear to be 1mm in size. This is the same effect that low resolution digital cameras can produce, it looks sometimes like grain, but really ugly grain.

    Another way of getting a scan is to print the negative on silver paper as a 4x5, then scan the print in reflective mode, the printing process will reduce the DMax to a more scanner friendly level and eliminates pixelation.

    For the web, you can usually get good enough results using a negative scan, keep your images small and use a reasonably high Jpeg compression ratio. I recommend that you imprint copyright information into the image before posting. The reason for keeping images small and using a high compression ratio is that there are still people using dial up connections. :rolleyes:
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin