|
Epson Perfection V750
|
#
¿
May 23, 2010 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Just started using a flextight X5. Owns owns owns owns owns
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2011 00:59
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:So jealous, you don't even know. Currently wondering if I would rather have my car or a coolscan 8000. Maybe the best part is that the software was designed for people to use. also this is 1/3rd the original scan size (this is a big pic) http://www.flickr.com/photos/cmattis/6311190800/sizes/o/in/photostream/
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2011 01:05
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:So I had some color film processed and this is driving me nuts. Is there some easy way to get this right because evidently I'm color retarded and I have to gently caress around with an image for like 20 minutes to even get it so it looks almost ok and it looks like rear end if I pick "White Balance" or "Auto Levels" or anything else in Vuescan. This is why you shoot a color card.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2012 09:32
|
|
|
I suppose I should post this here. I've decided to start offering a high quality scanning service. I have access to a Hasselblad Flextight X5. Pro shops charge a ton (up to $50 per image) for this service but since I'm not dependent on this to make a living I can charge a lot less, a flat rate of $15 per image, with a possible discount if you're doing a large volume (30+ images). PM me for details, if you don't have pms post your email and i'll contact you.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 07:05
|
|
|
if you want your stuff scanned at really good quality for cheap, i'll do it
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2012 09:23
|
|
|
let me run you through my general scanning/post process using this photo as an example http://www.flickr.com/photos/cmattis/6808723251/lightbox/. this photo isn't necessarily the best example since i wasn't going for very lifelike colors, but it's still a good representation of what i was going for. i start off with a 16 bit scan. the software that comes with the flextight scanners (flextouch i think) is really good imo. doesn't crash pretty much, is well laid out, and has curves and levels to work with. i work exclusively with the levels, i only use curves in post. i try to get my scans to be flat, there should be zero clipping in the highlights or shadows. i'll get rid of a color cast if it's ridiculously egregious, but most of the time i leave it as is, even with the blue cast with this scan i had zero problems with posterization. here's what it looks like straight out of scanner:  flat, has a color cast, but the image is very sharp and all the detail i'll need for the final image is there. the first thing i do is to do a curves layer to set the clipping point, this leaves an image that looks like this:  i used to do more color correction with curves layers, but a while ago i switched to using color balance layers instead and i find it more to my taste; it goes a lot faster for me. i add a color balance layer, tweak the sliders, and it comes out like this:  at this point, 90% of the work is done and it's probably been like half an hour or so, not counting spotting work (which there is no shortcut to). since i want this image to have bright, almost garish coloring, i add a vibrance adjustment layer. nothing too crazy, and it only changes it a little. comes out like this:  almost done at this point. i thought it was a little dim and flat, so i added a brightness/contrast adjustment layer and the image was ready for print.  the final image is something like 10k x 7k pixels, and as a 5 layer 16 bit tiff comes out to 1.5 gigs. you need plenty of space if you're scanning with this method, but to me it's ideal.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
I'm here for the laughs, and, further more, for the epic win, as well
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:What do you guys use for dust control on your scanners? going through elaborate dust prevention procedures wastes time that would be better spent spotting. use a rocket blower on the glass and the negatives. dust is inevitable
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:I'm mostly interested what its effective dmax is. As far as i know there is no scanner out there today that can scan 35mm without losing dynamic range, especially shadow drawing is pretty horrible on cheaper models. It is kind of ridiculous that outside a $11k Flextight the best we have are 10 year old Nikon Coolscans selling for 3x their original MSRP. It's not really ridiculous, there's very little incentive to develop new+better film scanners outside the high end
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
If you want to, you can send them to me and I'll scan them for cheap. I have access to a hasselblad flextight x5 and I'm a very experienced scanner and color corrector.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
Inf posted:I may take you up on that at some point. I have maybe 75 sheets of Ektachrome and Fuji RTPII to get started on. They all "expired" in 1998-2001, but they've been refrigerator stored since purchase in the early-mid 1990s. I'm hoping they're still in good shape. I never use lightroom for scans files. They come right out of the scanning software and into photoshop. The x5 scans at 8 or 16 bit only. A 16 bit scan at max dpi from a 4x5 is around 7 or 800MB I think, and photoshop will work with it though it might be slow on an out of date machine
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
whereismyshoe posted:my v500 up and died yesterday, i'm loving done with it. gently caress you epson. is the canoscan 9000 any good? don't waste your time buying trash scanners that don't work
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
jsmith114 posted:About a decade ago, I used Nikon and Imacon scanners professionally. I stopped shooting film many years back, but recently got a good enough deal on a Super Coolscan 5000 that I couldn't pass it up. I have recently started going through the boxes of negatives I have in my basement. In the early 2000's I did some 'tests' where I scanned negatives to .nef with a nikon ls-8000 and didn't see any difference between scanning to .nef or .tif. Now, I am not so sure. Am I getting more information, like if I scanned to a .fff on an Imacon? Is scanning to a tiff from a nikon film scanner any better or worse than scanning to a .nef file? use tiffs
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Yond Cassius posted:Maybe you could take three scans, with the iPad set to backlight the film with #FF0000, #00FF00, and #0000FF, respectively, and then composite them? ahahhaha
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I finally gooned up and decided to start making inroads on my massive backlog of film (literally years) to scan. Canned air on the negatives is stronger than a rocket blower. That should help a bit. The dirty secret is that there really isn't much of a shortcut. It's tiresome but that's what you get for shooting film.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Fedora Brandisher posted:I got an epson V550 and the thing is already covered in bits of dust and tiny hair, what's the best way to clean these things and keep them clean? Windex, a microfiber cloth, and compressed air/a rocket blower.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
Is this bad for glass or something? I've never heard anything like that
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Ammonia can dissolve the coatings off glass and melt or fog some kinds of plastic and it's volatile. Generally it's a no-no near photographic equipment of any kind. Scanners use coated glass? I wouldn't clean a lens with Windex but I've never seen any damage to a scanner from it. Then again, my flatbed experience is somewhat limited.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
just got my first ever drum scan. holy moley....
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 01:13
|
|