Digital BW, The Print

Norm, How much did these “high quality” scans cost? I have a Nikon 9000 and
it works very well. Many, in fact FAR too many, scan operators could not
punch there way out of a wet paper bag with their scanning skills. On those
rare occasions that I need a scan made from a 5x7 or 8x10 neg, I have taken
them to two local scanning services, both of which had drum scanners.
However, I could do better than both of them with my Epson 3200 and
stitching them together. I went in and taught one studio how to scan with
their software/hardware and still got charged for my scans. The other time I
had them try three times with coaching all along the way. I will not be
going back.

 

Eric

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Harry
Lockwood
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2007 1:51 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] B&W Scanning Quality

 

With a ³high end² Nikon scanner at 4000 ppi, that should not have happened.
I suspect they did the scans with some auto levels or curves or the like. I
get excellent B&W scans from my Nikon 4000 ED, and then do post processing,
not preprocessing.

Harry

On 12/23/07 1:53 PM, "nsams2002" <normsams@msn. <mailto:normsams%40msn.com>
com> wrote:

> I recently had a local photo store do some scanning for me of some B&W
35mm
> negatives. I was very disappointed with the results. Areas in shadow, the
> details of which are visible in the negatives, were complete lost in a sea
> of black. No way could I get Photoshop to bring out the details. The
> negatives were scanned by a high-end Nikon scanner (so I was told) and
show
> up as 4,000 pixels per inch. I asked if the scanning couldn't be adjusted
> to quiet down the blacks, and the answer was yes, but that this store
didn't
> do that kind of custom work, and didn't want to get into same. I was also
> told that the grain in the film made it very difficult to get a good scan.
> I was given a full refund, which I hadn't asked for, as some of the scans
> were somewhat o.k. So, I don't know. Maybe I should try a different shop?
> Would I be able to do better if I did my own scanning? (I don't want to
put
> a lot of money into a machine which I wouldn't be using all that much). Or
> is the scanning of negatives bound to result in a vastly inferior image?
> 
> Norm 
> 

-- 

Harry F. Lockwood

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]