Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How To Improve Sharpness On Scans  
User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 3108 times:

Dear Members of A.net,

Maybe this question is asked a lot but couldn't find it as far as I saw.

This photo is shot at a rainy day at Schiphol Amsterdam Airport.

I have tried many times to make the scan look sharper then it does these days at A.net

I hope there is somebody who can help me find the good answer for (better) scanning.

I scan with a Minolta QS 35+ slide scanner and a HP 5370 C Flatbed scanner.


Here is the Pic where it's all about !


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Jeffrey van Beek

with 640 hits on it Yeahhh  Smile I am proud about that.

Cheers,

Jeffrey van Beek EHAM The Netherlands  Smile

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

It's a cool shot. Good job.

This looks like print film. Did you scan a negative or a print? What kind of film was it? Did you use the flatbed or the Minolta?

Last night I scanned a bunch of negatives, and I could not get them to look anywhere near as sharp as I can with slide film, is spite of the film being Royal Gold 100, which should be pretty fine. Maybe someone can tell us why (I use a Coolscan III).

Charles


User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11951 posts, RR: 48
Reply 2, posted (12 years 12 months 13 hours ago) and read 2987 times:

And here I was thinking rain would ruin a picture. You prooved me wrong Jeffrey, wonderful pic.  Smile

Thom@s



"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 12 months 12 hours ago) and read 2981 times:

Dear Charles,

I used a Fuji Superia 200 asa print film.

And scanned the negatives with the Minolta QS 35 slide scanner.

Thanks for the answers Charles and Thomas + Glad you like this shot !
 Smile

Cheers,

Jeffrey van Beek


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 12 months 12 hours ago) and read 2984 times:

I previously used a Minolta Scan Duel, which I found returned somewhat grainy results like this.

Try this. Scan it so that you get a file 1800 or so across, sharpen, then resize it to around 1200 pixels across, sharpen again, and then do a final resize down to submission size, 950 or 1000 across. You might do a final sharpening again at the end.

I use Corel Photopaint 8, and find that resizing smooths out some details (including grain). Doing it like this might give better results.

Try it, and tell us how it worked.

Try some good, 100 ASA slide film. Fuji Sensia II and Provia are good, as is Kodak Elitechrome 100. You might be pleased with the results. I have no idea why negatives seem to give a harder time scanning.

Charles


User currently offlinePhilB From Ireland, joined May 1999, 2915 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (12 years 12 months 6 hours ago) and read 2948 times:

Using a Coolscan III I find that any 100 or 200 negative will give a far more grainy result than a 100 or 200 slide film.

Most times Photoshop or Paintshop will do the job for me and the time is worth the difference in cost for negs only developed print film as against slides.

The only real difficulties are with low light shots and i guess you hit this, given the amount of water the 747 is trying to pump!!


User currently offlineBO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2769 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (12 years 12 months 4 hours ago) and read 2938 times:

Nagavites are tough!
Slides I find are also Tough to scan at good quality.
Dunno why.
Unfortuneatly I have many negatives that lookg good on pritns but opposite on scans.
prolly willl keep trying thou.






Expanding my global domination one spotter at a time..
User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2916 times:

Thanks guys for your opinions here.......

I have bought 2 weeks ago a Fuju 400 Priva film and shot it full till the end of the film ("most of the time").

I took the film to the filmshop and they developed the film.
I have scanned 4 slides and all came out very dark with bad stipes all over it.

I shot the film with 1/250 - ft 8.0 shutterspeed with a hazy/sunny day not that bright sun.

What are I am doing wrong here the photo's are to bad for publish at A.net.

Cheers,

Jeffrey



User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 11 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2888 times:

Never thought it would be that difficult to scan negatives or slides.

It seems to be how faster technics grows howdifficult it be to scan.

I hope you know what I mean !  Smile

Regards,

Jeffrey


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2882 times:

BrainStorm123,

Fuju 400 Priva film? I hope it was Fuji 400 Provia Instead.

Without being able to see the slides, from your description it sounds to me that either your developer screwed up badly (most probable), your camera is letting some light in, or the film was messed up to begin with. Get an expert opinion if you can.

Do you have an automatic camera? or did you actually shoot every pic at 1/250 and f/8?

Charles


User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2865 times:

Made some mistakes here,

Let me explain to you charles.......

I used a Fuji Provia 400 slide film with my Pentax Z-20 camera which I maintain myself it also can be done by automatic camera options.

The day when I shot the pics it was a Hazy sunny day so I have set my cameras shutterspeed to 1/250

And set my sigma apo macro 70-300mm ft5.6 lens to
F.8 at the ring of the lens above the camera, hope you know what I mean (my english not that good).

Regards,

Jeffrey van Beek  Smile


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2866 times:

Jeffrey,

That's OK, you're English is better than my Dutch  Big grin

It sounds like you overrode the camera's ability to adjust for lighting by manually setting both speed and aperture.

I generally set my lens to F/8 and let the speed be calculated by the camera.

Charles


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 12, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2864 times:

It seems to me that the nose of the aircraft isn't quite in focus - but I also think that the grain pattern on the side of the image is not as sharp as the rest either. I think it might be your scanner hasn't focused properly at that edge of the image - I know this is a real problem with Nikon scanner if the film has any curl at all.

What can you try?

1) if your scanner allows it, use a strip film holder to keep the negs absolutely flat.

2) if you can, adjust the focus point of the scanner to the nose of the aircraft

3) if all else fails, try scanning the neg upside down - I think the grain is sharper on the left hand margin of the image.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2860 times:

Thanks charles,

Now the question: What settings need I make to shoot pictures with a Fuji Provia 400 slide film.

As example: with (bright)sunny wheater or what we have the most time here cloudy/rainy wheater.

Thanks for the time you guys for helping me out to find the right settings for better performance.

Cheers,

oh by the way have you seen the last two accepted pics from me have a look.

Jeffrey van Beek EHAM  Smile


User currently offlineFox1 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2852 times:

A friend sent me this:

1) Using Photoshop open an image of your choice. Do whatever other
enhancements you will be doing first- colour correction, contrast and
brightness, rotation, and resizing.

2) Be sure the "Layers/Channels/Paths" window is open. If not,
choose "Show Channels" in the Photoshop "Windows" menu.

3) Now go into "Image" and choose "Mode" and change the mode of the
image to "Lab Color."

4) Back on the "Channels" tab. Select the "Lightness" channel by
clicking on it. The image should now appear as a grayscale image.

This is the channel we want to sharpen. The reason is that this
is the part of the image that contains the most detail. If you don't
believe it, click on the other two channels and see what is there.
They look quite blurry.

5) Be sure that the image is shown at 100% or larger. Magnify it
(zoom in) if necessary. (Magnifying glass on tool bar).

6) Apply the amount of Unsharp Mask that you feel looks correct (in
the "Filter/Sharpen/Unsharp Mask"). Start with 50% amount, 1 pixel
radius and threshold at 2 or 3. (Don't generally use radius above 2
pixels or you will start to get halos.) If 50% is too sharp, back
down. If not sharp enough, go up. It takes more for printed photos than for viewing on a monitor.

7) Now go back and convert the image to RGB.

That's it. Using this method you can sharpen images yet prevent
them from looking "radioactive" from excessive JPEG glow.

If it looks too sharp or not sharp enough, go to Edit and Undo and
start over.


User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

Hi there

Thanks for the help you guys I have to
open my Minolta QS For cleaning there is a lot of
dust in it that will gave me some trouble today with scanning.

I hope that the new method for scanning will have better results then before.

Thanks everybody for you time and help.

Cheers,

Jeffrey van Beek


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Any Idea On How To Improve This posted Wed Aug 7 2002 09:57:28 by 707cmf
Any Suggestions On How To Improve This? posted Fri Jun 21 2002 23:36:13 by EGGD
How To Improve This Rejected One posted Mon Nov 27 2006 09:37:27 by Gerardo
How To Improve This One posted Sun Nov 12 2006 17:06:58 by Pitchul
How To Improve Photo posted Sun Jul 9 2006 17:53:29 by McG1967
How To Reduce Noise On posted Wed Mar 29 2006 16:13:02 by AirMalta
How To Improve My Scanning Technique posted Fri Feb 18 2005 22:14:14 by Singel09
BadQuality - How To Improve? posted Sun Feb 13 2005 01:41:15 by Mdwalkman
Help Needed. How To Improve This Pic posted Fri Sep 17 2004 03:45:50 by ManBurkert
How To Improve This Very Rare Photo? posted Sat Sep 11 2004 22:31:48 by Blackhawk144