Topic: Arrghhh scanning is griving me nuts!!

[RandomHamster]

Ok, its not such a new topic but can anyone either;

A) give me some advise about scanning with the Epson 4990
B) Tell me of a commercial not tooo dear scanning firm
C) Tell me of a film/slide scanner thats good and not too expensive
or
D) Hit me over the head with a kipper and tell me what im doing wrong!!!

(If D prefer a fresh kipper) 

I have been trying to scan using Epson 4990 for a few months but dont really seem to be getting the image results I want.  They always seem soft, a bit 'blocky' without good definition and getting decent exposure seems really hard with B&W negs.
Ive been trying both B&W and colour slide recently but still no joy unless I want 4x6 prints...I dont....I want A4 minimum!!!

Ive tried using Epson scan, silverfast, vuescan etc with not much difference though Epson scan seems better then silverfast.  Ive tried at different resolutions for the various print sizes I wanted and still not much joy.  I have turned off all the in-house options like sharpening, ICE etc and try to correct exposure before scanning so as not to loose too much info during the scan.  Ive tried in the mounts, out of the mounts, inbetween plastic sheets etc (oooerrrrrrr!).

I know some of you get good results from the Epson 4990, am I just doing it wrong?
Should I give up and get a film/slide scanner? Or get it done commercially.

I am becoming a very frustrated Random Hamster!!! Please help?   

[RandomHamster]

Errr, when I say A4 minimum I would be very happy to get just under A4 size...honest...!!! 

[tijeras]

I use it with decent results...
are you scanning in professional mode?

tijeras
aka
astrobeck

[formica]

are you scanning for on line use or to be printed from?

               william

[okayku]

A lot of people have had frustration to no end with getting scanners to give them the results they wants, especially with color negatives.  I just recently started scanning negatives using Vuescan and profiling the film before scanning works relatively well for me.  However, I still haven't gotten the exact results that I want but am satisfied with what I get for purposes of displaying online.  If I wanted to get prints, I would still probably get it done commercially at the local professional photo lab.

[Pete_R]

Softness can be just poor focus. These scanners are known to have the point of focus some way off where the film sits. It's worth experimenting with lifting the film holder away from the glass a little. With mine (same scanner) I found three business cards under each corner of the film holder improved the focus noticeably - not an earth shaking improvement but noticeable.

As for the 'blocky' effect. I think we need an example to see what you mean.

[david b]

Results are always going to be a little soft using a flatbed to scan negatives. If it's purely for making web-sized jpegs, then fine, but if you want decent sized prints with something approaching the sharpness of the original neg. then the only option is to try and find a used film scanner, of which the Minolta ones are probably the best bet.  The Dimage Multi Pro in particular.

[RandomHamster]

Hi all,

Becks- Yep am scanning in professional mode,

Formica- would like to make prints as well as web images, but even web images arent so hot!

I guess its the small size of the neg/slide.  It coped fairly well with 120 film and I have printed that at home to just under A4 size fairly happily. 
Its frustrating though, I want to be able to use scan, use photoshop and work on my negs digitally, then send off if needed for larger prints but cann't even do that at the moment!
I did notice that sandwiched between 2 pieces of perspex 4mm thick seemed a slight improvement, though scratches showed horribly from the plastic!     

[Karl]

can you show some examples of the problems?

[Francois]

I know with mine (4490) I have to use the unsharp mask feature. ICE is just for dust and scratch removal and doesn't work well with standard silver based B&W film (the silver in the emulsion can be mistaken for dust since it blocks infrared radiation). But for scanning color work, it does miracles.

The problem with flatbeds is that they scan through the glass. Thus you can get a bit of diffusion of the image. I always scan in 16 bit mode to get the maximum amount of color information. That way, when I adjust the histogram in Photoshop, I don't loose much.

I also like to adjust the scan exposure first. But make sure your screen is well calibrated

Exposure shouldn't affect resolution. I don't tell the scanner what size image I plan on getting. To get my DPI setting right, I use ScanCalc. It's free software and works wonders.

If you get blocky images, look more on the resolution side.

Now, if you want the ultimate in sharpness, you can always get a dedicated film scanner. These have an autofocus mechanism that ensures the highest quality. While going through an old magazine where they tested a 520GBP (2005 price) Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 (35mm scanner) they got on eBay and compared it to a Nikon D50. They say the scanner will do a 41 megapixel equivalent from film. Looks like a very nice piece of kit.

But if you're on the cheap side (like me), and you want those photoshop images to be tack sharp without the usual artifacts that come with the different sharpen tools (like halos around hard edges), you might want to try out LAB sharpening:
-Take the image and switch it from RGB to LAB color.
-Open the Channels palette (windows-channels)
-Select the Lightness channel
-Apply an unsharp mask using a value of between 100-150%, a pixel radius of image resolution/200 and a threshold of zero
-Return the image to RGB mode.

I do this after all work on the image is complete. I save in either PSD or TIFF when the image is getting worked on. Saving the file over and over in JPEG mode degrades it quite a bit. If the image came from a JPEG, I save it as TIFF so as not to damage the image anymore.

Hope this was of some help...

[david b]

The Scan Elite 5400 scanners are selling for a lot less these days ... unfortunate because I sold mine recently!  They're astonishingly good if you only need to scan 35mm - better than multi-thousand pound Imacons in many cases.

[moominsean]

i use a 4490 now and haven't noticed any softness. i turn off all the bells and whistles and do the work after. scan usually at 1200 or 1600 dpi.  see  the example.  it scans about the same as my old canoscan.

and griving your nuts sounds very painful.

[Sorry, image deleted during forum software upgrade. Please re-upload if so inclined.]

[LT]

ok - here is my workflow with my epson 3200 and vuescan for web presentation.  Might be of some help?

place neg in holder facing up, not down as holder instructs (they come out sharper this way)

set vuescan input tab to the "more" option and set as follows:
task = scan to file
mode = b&w negative
bits p pixel = 16 bit
make grey from = auto
preview = 800 dpi
scan = 1600 dpi
tick the "mirror" box (to rectify the reversed negative)
I only use one pass, but you may want to use more

In filter tab turn off all other than tick the "sharpen" box

In Color tab:

set brightness to between 0.75 and 1.25 depending on negative (this can be done after the preview and before final scan)
set b&w vendor to "Kodak" and brand to " "T-Max-100"
Set "B&W Type" to "T-Max Cl = .55"
leave the rest as they are

In Output Tab:

Output as a Tif with no compression.

IN preferences tab turn off auto refresh and select linear histogram

preview the scan. manually select the crop you want then select the scan tab in the image viewing area.  Press control + E to refresh the screen.  now look at the histogram in the bottom left and move the sliders to the edges of the line to set the black and white points to where you want them (If vuescan hasnt already got them right).  always press control+e after every change to refresh the screen. When you;re happy press scan.  Double check the final scan setting on the histogram and click save when you're done.

Now go to photoshop and open the tif.  Immediately apply unsharp masking at about 150% at a radius of 1.5 with threshold set to 0.  Mess about with selections and  levels and curves or whatever until you;re picture is where you want it to be.  now go to image size and  make sure all the lower left hand boxes are ticked. set the longest side to between 450 and 700 pixels and click ok.  then apply USM again at 30 % and radius 0.3 do this three times to get back the sharpness lost by making the image smaller.  then when done, click on the save for web option in the File menu and mess around with the quality option until the file meets teh max size required.  All done.

I cant really help with printing from digital files as I havent done that for at least 5 years, and things have moved on a long way since then.  In fact the above workflow is probably way out of date already, but it works well enough for me. 



 

[Susan B.]

what Leon said...

That, and another trick is using anti-newton glass rather than the carrier. It's a headache, but can be golden if done right.

[seekingfocus]

Dalton made a great post a couple of weeks ago which is pretty much identical to my workflow. I'm pretty happy with the 12x12" prints I'm able to get from this method and even at times go to 16x16".

http://www.daltonrooney.com/weblog/2008/04/16/taking-a-picture-part-four-analog-to-digital/

There's also a really great article from Colin Jago describing how to use VueScan to get 16bit linear scans and get quite a noticeable increase in tonal range...

http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photowords/?page_id=1225

And, as others have mentioned, check into the anti-newton glass and variable height mounting station... will make a HUGE difference in overall sharpness right off the scanner with no sharpening in software (at least it did for me).

http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/mstation.html

-Jason

[RandomHamster]

Gosh, thats a lot of good ideas out there, thanks everyone!

Moominsean, your picture is beautifull, I really like that and the softness just makes it so etherial.  And your right, griving me nuts does sound painfull...er...think I ought to check my spelling better!!!!!! 

Francois, will try your sharpening technique, I hadn't hear of that before.

Leon, gosh thats a lot to remember, will print that out and try that method too!  Think I will have to buy vuescan.

Seekingfocus, cheers for that, I will check out the link and have a go at your workflow.  12 x 12" prints would be fine!
Sounds like a  trip to the betterscanning website may be in order too then, be worth it if I can get the results I want.

I have just got two slide films back from my week in Durham, all taken with the Bessa R3a and 15mm voigtlander lens.  I had the slides printed at the lab but the results were terrible! All showed heavy grain and the colours had washed out, exposure was awfull.  Digital prints nowadays isn't it?....think true print may have done better!!
With that in mind I am going to have another go tonight with some of these new slides and will let you know what happens...maybe even post a shot or two on the forum if they come out! 

Thankyou again everyone, I will persever 

[okayku]

RandomHamster, one more link for you  Here's Richard Hart's description of his scanning workflow. I haven't tried it yet as I just came across the link but his results seem to be pretty good.  Good luck! - Kevin

http://www.ur-ban.com/wiki/index.php?title=Epson_V700_Scanning

[Francois]

For most of my workflow, I have everything scripted using actions. I just press Play and wait.