Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,524   Posts: 1,543,868   Online: 898
      
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 51 to 52 of 52
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    211
    The shots don't look bad for 35mm. I'm assuming you are unhappy with the visible grain. Tips on reducing visible grain: 1. Different chemistry yields different results; I find the Tetnal press kit produces more visible grain in my scans than the Rollei Chemistry. 2. For Portra 400 I err on the side of overexposure; negative film can handle it well and it will help reduce visible grain. 3. Scan at 2000 to 3000 dpi with no sharpening, apply your post processing changes before reducing the size, reduce size then sharpen to taste remembering that sharpening will enhance the visible grain so its a balance of what is acceptable to you.

    Hope this comment doesn't stray to far into digi-land for APUG or I will be chastised........... Another thing I have read you may want to consider when evaluating your shots is that blue will typically have more noise than the other channels in a negative scan. This is because that channel would have higher amplification relative to the other channels in a negative scan to compensate for the orange mask. This is consistent with what I have seen and makes sense. So perhaps overexposing when you have a lot of blue in the frame may help to reduce apparent grain in your scans. I have not actually done any purposeful testing to verify but it makes sense because it would result in a higher SN ratio on the blue channel. Good luck!

  2. #52
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,325
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Lamar View Post
    The shots don't look bad for 35mm. I'm assuming you are unhappy with the visible grain. Tips on reducing visible grain: 1. Different chemistry yields different results; I find the Tetnal press kit produces more visible grain in my scans than the Rollei Chemistry. 2. For Portra 400 I err on the side of overexposure; negative film can handle it well and it will help reduce visible grain. 3. Scan at 2000 to 3000 dpi with no sharpening, apply your post processing changes before reducing the size, reduce size then sharpen to taste remembering that sharpening will enhance the visible grain so its a balance of what is acceptable to you.

    Hope this comment doesn't stray to far into digi-land for APUG or I will be chastised........... Another thing I have read you may want to consider when evaluating your shots is that blue will typically have more noise than the other channels in a negative scan. This is because that channel would have higher amplification relative to the other channels in a negative scan to compensate for the orange mask. This is consistent with what I have seen and makes sense. So perhaps overexposing when you have a lot of blue in the frame may help to reduce apparent grain in your scans. I have not actually done any purposeful testing to verify but it makes sense because it would result in a higher SN ratio on the blue channel. Good luck!
    Now now, no talk of scanning techniques or resampling, those pics nor discussion aren't allowed here :-P

    (Only because you asked for it haha) (and also because I was just reprimanded for even ASKING such a question about if it were ok... haha)

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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