Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
Anonymous
How to get better results when scanning film? 2017-03-14 01:49:27 Post No. 3039111
[Report] Image search: [Google]
How to get better results when scanning film? 2017-03-14 01:49:27 Post No. 3039111
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: canoscan9000fm2_plate_675x450.jpg (111KB, 675x450px) Image search:
[Google]
111KB, 675x450px
How to get better results when scanning film?
Anonymous
2017-03-14 01:49:27
Post No. 3039111
[Report]
Starting a new thread because I believe this goes a bit beyond what I could get out of the film thread.
I currently use a Canoscan 9000f II and seem to get varied results out of it. Sometimes I get really sharp scans and other times I get images that are very unsharp, almost out of focus. I scan in tiff format and don't apply any presets or settings that the scanner offers, with some sharpness added inside of LR I get some decent results most of the time.
Now my question really is that am I developing wrong or am I scanning wrong, I don't know where the fault is but I know I'm doing something wrong to consistently get shitty results. Maybe I don't let my film dry long enough so it doesn't sit flat on the scanner? I only dry it for around 40 minutes.
Any tips would be great, also feel free to discuss other scanning related stuff in this thread.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 675 Image Height 450 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2012:11:29 16:17:45 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 675 Image Height 450
>>
Dry the film until it is dry. After that, Let it sit (in a sleeve of course) under some heavy books for a day or two and it should be flat. Another tip is to put the film directly on the glas,instead of the film holder (just place the holder on top of the film) as you can get slightly sharper pictures that way.
Also posting a few examples might help
>>
Film is a dead format
>>
>>3039111
>I only dry it for around 40 minutes.
try extending the time to 1-2 hours
>>
File: DSC05219.jpg (5MB, 5883x3912px) Image search:
[Google]
5MB, 5883x3912px
dslrcuckscan4lyfe
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 0 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2017:03:15 01:15:14 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/0.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Brightness -6.7 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 0.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 5883 Image Height 3912 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>
>>3039116
>implying most great artists aren't dead inside and thus make a perfect match
>>
I have the same scanner and it's not the greatest for film. You need a dedicated film scanner. Libraries that offer archival services have these for you to use for free.
>>
>>3039258
I thought this was a dedicated film scanner? It's marketed everywhere as a film scanner.
>>
>>3039266
it's first and foremost a flatbed document scanner, with some cheap plastic film holders thrown in for marketing and mad profits
>>
File: 287617-9164cc844ceb47817054cf5f1b907e5b.jpg (68KB, 884x800px) Image search:
[Google]
68KB, 884x800px
>>3039113
>Dry the film until it is dry.
>>
>>3039269
It has a light that comes behind the film, it's not just a document scanner.
>>
more than 2400 dpi or 20 megapixel slide camera
>>
File: thatsthejoke.jpg (24KB, 490x355px) Image search:
[Google]
24KB, 490x355px
>>3039272
Thread posts: 13
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4