Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

Thread

micro-scratches on scans

2003-04-29 by digikdm

having scanned many of my B&W negatives recently with a Nikon 4000 
coolscan( digital ICE is off), i noticed that many of my negatives 
have at least one and often multiple micro-scratches of varing 
length. These negatives have not been subjected to any unusual abuse 
that i am aware of. I use an air gun and gently wipe the negatives 
with a clean lint free pad to clean them before scanning.Although the 
micro-scratches can be "cloned" out, i am wondering  about the 
following:                                                          
1. Are these micro-sratches present in most negatives that are 
scanned with high-res scanners?
2. Are the micro-scratches significant in regards to creating good 
wet darkroom prints in the future?
3.Can they be avoided or kept to a minimum?

thanks for any insights!!
k.monroe

Re: [Digital BW] micro-scratches on scans

2003-04-29 by James Klebau

Point source and condenser enlargers present the same problem -- very sharp,
and mercilessly so with grain and scratches. Nikon scanners use a small
point light source that has the same effect. Polaroid and others use a
flourescent bulb for the light source, similar in effect to a diffusion
enlarger. 

When I compared a nikon scanner with a polaroid scanner, the nikon was
slightly sharper but revealed much more grain and surface flaws.
My rough guess would be that the nikon was 5% sharper, but revealed 100%
more grain and defects. In Photoshop I could easily use the unsharp mask
filter to sharpen the polaroid image to surpass the nikon image. When I
tried to sharpen the nikon image, the graininess would limit what I could
do.

Jim

Show quoted textHide quoted text

On 4/29/03 9:33 AM, "digikdm" <monroekd@...> wrote:

> having scanned many of my B&W negatives recently with a Nikon 4000
> coolscan( digital ICE is off), i noticed that many of my negatives
> have at least one and often multiple micro-scratches of varing
> length. These negatives have not been subjected to any unusual abuse
> that i am aware of. I use an air gun and gently wipe the negatives
> with a clean lint free pad to clean them before scanning.Although the
> micro-scratches can be "cloned" out, i am wondering  about the
> following:       
> 1. Are these micro-sratches present in most negatives that are
> scanned with high-res scanners?
> 2. Are the micro-scratches significant in regards to creating good
> wet darkroom prints in the future?
> 3.Can they be avoided or kept to a minimum?
> 
> thanks for any insights!!
> k.monroe
>

Re: micro-scratches on scans

2003-04-30 by Doug I.

...Of course,  the LED (Nikon) light source is reported to significantly
outperform fluorescents in terms of Digital ICE performance. You just can't
win. :-)

To the original poster, I'd suggest trying a different (pro-oriented) lab
for processing to see if the problem goes away. Try to give your negs a
slight bend when sliding in and out of sleeves, vs. dragging the emulsion.
Another option is to experiment with the C-41 B&W films so you can use ICE
and forget about it entirely.

Doug

Show quoted textHide quoted text

> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:03:31 -0600
> From: James Klebau <jklebau@...> Subject: Re: micro-scratches on
> scans
> 
> Point source and condenser enlargers present the same problem -- very sharp,
> and mercilessly so with grain and scratches. Nikon scanners use a small point
> light source that has the same effect. Polaroid and others use a flourescent
> bulb for the light source, similar in effect to a diffusion enlarger.
> 
> When I compared a nikon scanner with a polaroid scanner, the nikon was
> slightly sharper but revealed much more grain and surface flaws. My rough
> guess would be that the nikon was 5% sharper, but revealed 100% more grain and
> defects. In Photoshop I could easily use the unsharp mask filter to sharpen
> the polaroid image to surpass the nikon image. When I tried to sharpen the
> nikon image, the graininess would limit what I could do.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> On 4/29/03 9:33 AM, "digikdm" <monroekd@...> wrote:
> 
>> having scanned many of my B&W negatives recently with a Nikon 4000
>> coolscan( digital ICE is off), i noticed that many of my negatives
>> have at least one and often multiple micro-scratches of varing
>> length. These negatives have not been subjected to any unusual abuse
>> that i am aware of. I use an air gun and gently wipe the negatives
>> with a clean lint free pad to clean them before scanning.Although the
>> micro-scratches can be "cloned" out, i am wondering  about the
>> following:
>> 1. Are these micro-sratches present in most negatives that are
>> scanned with high-res scanners?
>> 2. Are the micro-scratches significant in regards to creating good
>> wet darkroom prints in the future?
>> 3.Can they be avoided or kept to a minimum?
>> 
>> thanks for any insights!!
>> k.monroe
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Message: 15
> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 17:43:02 -0000
> From: "Antonis Ricos" <antonisphoto@...> Subject: Re: simple B&W
> printing on Epson 2200 ?
> 
> John,
> 
> look at the archives here - we have discussed this way too many times, it
> seems.  If you are on Mac OS 8 or 9 the simplest thing is OPM and its free.
> 
> Antonis
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Anyhow, I'm wondering, has anything changed ?  Has a silver bullet
>> been found ?
>> 
>> Thanks, John
>>

Re: micro-scratches on scans

2003-05-01 by bbstudio_photo

I've actually switched to shooting all color film, even when I want black and 
white prints. When I want a black and white print, I use the popular Photoshop 
Channel Mixer technique to optimize the monochrome conversion.

It's the best of both worlds: Digital ICE is effective on the dye-based color film, 
and the Channel Mixer lets you try different black and white interpretations of 
the color scene, rather than the one version you'd get with straight black and 
white film (unless you're shooting BW with a bag of color filters). The only 
drawback is that if you appreciate the characteristics of specific black and 
white films, you kind of lose that if you shoot color to black and white.

Conrad

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Doug I." <
puzzolente@e...> wrote:
> Another option is to experiment with the C-41 B&W films so you can use ICE
> and forget about it entirely.

Digital BW, The Print

micro-scratches on scans

micro-scratches on scans

Re: [Digital BW] micro-scratches on scans

Re: micro-scratches on scans

Re: micro-scratches on scans

Move to quarantaine