Digital BW, The Print

Gabriel,

> > It appears you are scanning in raw mode,
>
> The Epson driver doesn't have a raw mode, I set it to auto-expose
> and scan in 16 bits reflective with the white cover installed.

It gives you high bit data that has the setpoints and tonal curve set then?
I just checked that in my 836XL driver, and you're right, I hadn't noticed
that...damn that's both stupid and smart ;-)  That's a good thing, to a
point, but they should allow you to get the raw data as well.

> > ...you read that into Photoshop and set your setpoints and adjust
> > your tonal curves in PS, right?
>
> Yup, what seems to be garbage can become quite usable because
> with the high bit depth the information is there.

As the setpoints are already set, why can't you simply get the tonal curve
right in the driver?  In the Epson driver I have there is a tonal curve
tool.  My point is, the scanner scans in high bit mode anyway, then applies
the tonal curve, then sends you the data, whether it's 8 bit or 16 bit.
It's simply a matter of where you do your tonal curve adjustment...

> The 2450 is 16 bit,

I doubt that.  No current film scanner is actually 16 bits.  It takes any
bit depth over 8 bits and puts it into 16 bits.

> > It's really got nothing to do with "16 bit scans", but whether
> you can do
> > setpoints and tonal curves in your scanner driver, and I can't imaging a
> > scanner driver that wouldn't allow for that.
> >
>
> If need be I can adjust each image individually in PS.  If I did
> this with an 8 bit scan they would fall apart instantly.

Yes, you should do all tonal adjustments in high bit mode, no doubt...but as
I asked above, what do you find better about PS than the Epson driver?  Is
it that the Epson driver doesn't have a histogram?  I haven't found one
there yet...and that certainly is a compelling reason to do it the way you
are...  Also, it appears the Epson driver doesn't have any zoom feature...
OK, I'm starting to see why I'd do it the same way you are.

> Your points are well taken, but I find this method works well for
> me.  I can scan a page of 9 6x7 negs and click print in just a
> few minutes.

Of course, and that's the most compelling reason to do something a
particular way ;-)

Setpoints are SO critical, and I wish drivers had a better tool for setting
them...like a histogram that you could zoom in on, and that would somehow
highlight the point in the image that corresponded to the point/range in the
histogram you have selected...that would allow for really accurate setpoint
setting.  Also, a way of seeing if any valid image data is being lost
because of your chosen setpoints.

Regards,

Austin