Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Camera Problem  
User currently offlineEddgge From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 123 posts, RR: 4
Posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

I have a Nikon F-501 SLR body, a Nikkor 78-210 mm lens and a HP Photosmart S20 filmscanner.
I have tried to use both slide and negative films (Sensia 100 and Superia 100). When I scan these pics I always get a very grainy result (mostly on the sky and grass areas) and I always get my pics rejected here at a.net. I always try to photograph in good light conditions (sunny days).

So my question is, will some kind of filter help me? What filters are recommended? Or can it be something else that is wrong (the lens maybe)?

Best regards,
Gustaf

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1879 times:

Can you show us an example please?

LGW


User currently offlineF27 From Australia, joined Oct 2001, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1879 times:

I use the Hp photo scanner and i have never had these problems before could it be your lenses that re causing the ptoblem and not the scanner

User currently offlineEddgge From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

Here is a example, not one of my best photos, but u can clearly see what I mean.

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=tf-fix-753.jpg

Gustaf


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

and thats the working link
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=tf-fix-753.jpg



-
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1853 times:

Looking at the example provided, I'm guessing part of the problem is slight underexposure (perhaps 1/2 stop) as there is very little detail in the shadow areas. Scanning underexposed film will always accentuate any grain. But I also think "noise" from the scanner another part of the problem - this is generally most apparant in the blue channel (ie. the sky!). All scanners generate noise, but this can be made worse by having the scanner too close to other equipment, poor power supply etc. Sometimes repositioning the scanner helps.

In the example provided, the effect has been made more obvious through sharpening - it appears you have sharpened the entire image. You could try selectively sharpening only parts of the image - for instance, masking out the sky would significantly reduce the visible graininess.

Apart from paying attention to exposure, I see no problem on the camera side of things - I can't image a circumstance in which the lens can increase or reduce grain, nor are there any filters.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineEddgge From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1852 times:

Many thanx for Your answer Colin! I will try to move the scanner (it´s placed just beside my monitor) and to set the camera to another exposer time.

What about using a filter on the lens? I have heard that this may make better and more natrual colors on eg the sky, is this true? And what filter may be the right one to buy?

Gustaf


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 14
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1835 times:

Try Fuji Reala 100, wonderful print film with almost no grain.

Luis


User currently offlineWietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1839 times:

Luis is right: Reala is the best print film for the price


Wietse de Graaf
User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1834 times:

Filters - a UV filter can help reduce distant haze, but has no other effect on colours - some like to keep one on the lens permenantly as protection from scratches.

A Skylight filter is similar, but has a very slight warming effect

81A and 81B are stronger version of the above, and have a distinct warming effect - useful on dull days, or to take the blueness out of shadows in noon-day sun.

Polariser - for stunning blue skies with puffy white clouds - BUT - only works at certain angles to the sun, and requires 1 1/2 - 2 stops exposure compensation. Useless on dull days.

Cheers,

colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks ago) and read 1824 times:

Polariser - for stunning blue skies with puffy white clouds - BUT - only works at certain angles to the sun, and requires 1 1/2 - 2 stops exposure compensation

Just like to contend the exposure compensation thing on polarisers Colin... Might have been true when cameras didn't have TTL meters and everyone was toting a hand-held meter, but these days most modern SLR TTL meters should deal with a polariser without the user having to set any exposure compensation on camera. What is true of polarisers with moderns SLRs is that they will reduced the EV by 1 1/2 to 2 stops, effectively meaning a slower shutter speed or wider aperture.

[PEDANT MODE OFF]

One other thing to think about if anyone's contemplating a polariser - they come in linear or circular forms. Make sure you buy the one that's right for your camera's metering system, as the wrong one will wreck the exposure setting calculated by the camera's meter - most modern AF cameras need a circular polariser, which sadly are usually a bit more expensive than linear polarisers.

Andy


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1807 times:

Andy - you're right of course, what I should have said is that you loose 1 1/2 - 2 stops. Must have been having a "senior moment".

But further cautions on polarisers - does the front of your lens rotate when focusing? If so, polarisers are a REAL pain. The polarisor works by your rotating one element of the filter over another - the correct amount of rotation is dependent on the angle of the light. If you set this up just right, and focusing then realigns the whole assembly, you have to start over again!

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineEddgge From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1766 times:

Oops, that sounds like a lot of "extra work"... My lens rotates when focusing so I guess a polariser is nothing for me :s

I might just try a UV filter as start  Big grin

Gustaf


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...
Camera Problem posted Thu Jun 20 2002 01:01:03 by Staffan
Camera Problem posted Tue May 28 2002 10:40:45 by Eddgge
Opinions Needed -- Problem With Lens/camera? posted Sat Jun 10 2006 05:56:29 by Lnglive1011yyz
Advice On Camera And Lenses Problem Please posted Fri Feb 10 2006 18:11:11 by LGW
Camera Film Problem posted Fri Aug 27 2004 14:26:43 by Planespotterx
EOS 300D-Problem Downloading From Camera To PC posted Thu Jun 24 2004 20:58:09 by UA935
Adaptor To Use 1 Camera's Lenses On Different Body posted Thu Mar 5 2009 11:11:50 by Chase
Which Camera Should I Get? posted Wed Feb 25 2009 16:23:28 by RichM
Camera Setting posted Tue Feb 10 2009 00:47:32 by Robertuk22
Advice On Editing - Contrast Problem posted Mon Feb 9 2009 11:25:41 by DLH405heavy