MDL_777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 267 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1716 times:
I recently uploaded these two pictures, and had them rejected due to being "blurry or unsharp." I worked on re-sharpening them, including sharpening key aspects like the reg, titles, logo, etc, and was able to upload them to the "other" site. My question is if I have improved them enough to have another go at uploading them here. Let me know what you think.
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1697 times:
I think they both have a half-chance. They aren't at the best angle, and look a bit soft and you've oversharpened them (look at the registration, windows and space between the wing and the flaps, there are jagged edges and the lettering is distorted).
Might have a chance, worth uploading them just to see.
Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1700 times:
I don't think so... badscan I think. Sorry.
However, given you've used Provia, Vuescan and a Scan Dual II I am a bit mystified - the images should be coming out better than they are unless the original images aren't much good. What settings are you using in VueScan???
MDL_777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 267 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1657 times:
Andy, I would have to wait until I got home from work to let you know about the Vuescan settings. I do know generally, that with slides, I use no grain reduction, and I may adjust the brightness settings. It's kind of strange to me as well, because I've been able to successfully upload several pictures from that same roll of film to this site (ID#'s 266796-266801).
But that makes me think of something, and I don't know if there's anything to this or not. I take a lot of shots from this particular location behind runway 18R, and since Charlotte is a US Airways hub, I get a lot of their A319's and 737's. When I look back at the other sets of slides that I have taken, it seems like the pictures of the 319's generally come out better than the 737's. I'm wondering if it has anything to do with the approach speed. I've noticed that the 737's tend to come in more "hot" than the 319's. Maybe this is why I'me getting more motion blur in my 737 shots. I don't know, that's just a thought. Any ideas?
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 744 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1605 times:
The 1st shot is certainly not sharp enough, the 2nd - maybe ... looks like it could stand a little more USM.
In terms of contrast, I think you are actually getting a pretty good scan - this is a high contrast situation after all, but it needs a little toning down in PS to provide a pleasing image. I think the highlights have been correctly captured, which is the most important thing - all you need to do is use level or curves to bring out the shadow detail a bit ... the shadow detail appears to be present (its not solid black) but it is a bit dark.
The distinction between a "bad scan" and "bad post processing" is often difficult to determine, and you can spend hours playing with scanning settings to no avail when 5 minutes in PS would do the trick - conversly, no amount of playing around in PS can salvage an incorrectly scanned image!
So how do you tell what went wrong where? The critical thing with a scan is to get the white and black points correct - nothing else really matters. If the scan has highlights just touching pure white, and the darkest shadows just touching pure black, you are in good shape - but note that scanners can be fooled by scratches and dust which generate false white and black points!
Also keep in mind that your image may not have any true highlights or shadows - your scanner doesn't know this, and assumes the brightest part of the image is white, the darkest black - this again will distort the scan and you must make allowances.
Anyway, once you've got your scan with correct highlights and shadows, the distribution of brightness throughout the rest of the image is best handled in PS using the curves and levels.
The most common mistake I see with an image such as yours is trying to create a brighter image by scanning it for greater exposure - all this does is burns out the highlights and create very grainy, washed out shadow areas.
If you don't want to use PS (or similar), you could increase the gamma setting (now I think incorrectly labelled "brightness" ) in Vuescan, but levels and curves in PS is a better method.
Oh yes, by generating 16 bit scans you will have more scope for tone adjustments (as the software has more data to play with) - convert to 8 bit only when you have to.