Dispatcher From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 254 posts, RR: 4 Posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4038 times:
I've just got into using the negative scanning feauture of my HP Scanjet 4890 but have encountered some problems as follows:
Low res scans (<600 dpi) have good color / contrast but of course lack detail when scanning the negative. For example, I can't read the number on the nose but the sky and clouds are properly exposed.
High res scans (>600 - 9600 dpi) Sky and cloud detail is completely blown out, no clouds are even visible and the definition between the top of the fuse and the sky is completely lost. However, the small details such as the number on the nose are very clear.
It almost seems to me that the longer the scanner is spending going over the image for the higher resolution, it is almost like it is 'overexposing' it and blowing out the details. I tried searching the forum here but got no joy, please excuse me if I overlooked something obvious.
This all came about from an inquiry into the purchase of one of my photo's displayed here that was scanned from a 4x6 print a long time ago. In the print, both the nose number and clouds are visible with fairly good contrast, not great but ok. I would like to send the individual a much better rendition of the actual photo if possible but I'm starting to get frustrated. I have even tried scanning the 4x6 print again and it looks better than the negative scan in color / brightness / contrast but then it is covered with scratches and dirt. Here's the link to the A.net photo in question.
CalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3987 times:
I don't know that model of scanner so can't offer much help. A guess about the definition between fuselage and sky though is that the scanner might be using extrapolation to increase the resolution? If you can, try the scan at the unit's highest native resolution and see if it improves.
Another thing you could try is turning on/off the Digital ICE (or any other dust/scratch software you're using) in case it is causing the problem.
I'm kind of stumped though - can't imagine why changing the resolution is affecting the overall brightness/contrast levels. I use an Epson Perfection 4870 and changing resolution has no affect on exposure. It also has manual levels, gamma and curves adjustments that can be applied betwen previewing and scanning the slide. If yours has the same options, manually setting levels might solve the exposure problem.
Dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1730 posts, RR: 57
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3985 times:
Quoting Dispatcher (Reply 1): Come on guys, I know if anybody can help me the folks on THIS forum can!
I read the message last night and whilst I do do a lot of slide and negative scanning - I simply do not have an answer.
I use a Minolta Scan Elite and did use a Nikon Coolscan III and both have a curves adjustment. Maybe lowering the contrast a bit using that (if yours has it) would help.
Granite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5615 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3908 times:
Quoting Dispatcher (Reply 5): Guilty as charged. Just downloaded VueScan and will give it a try tonight.
Thanks for your input guys!
It takes a while getting the scans the way you want them but believe me it works great. A lot of fiddly settings but start with the standard default scan then choose your film emulsion before final scanning.
Scan settings can be saved as a .ini file so if you want, mail me at email@example.com and I can send you my negscan.ini file which is set as my default scan.
Dispatcher From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 254 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3888 times:
Wow, what a difference. I guess the bundled software from HP is a total joke. Just scanned with the demo version of VueScan and it pulled detail off the negative I didn't realize was even there. In fact it now looks like the original photo was taken near sunset with lots of colors in the sky. I really can't remember what the real sky looked like when it was captured but it looks pretty good now! I don't have the cash budgeted at the moment for the $50 entry fee but I'll pick it up soon. Thanks for the great help guys!!