how do you do it? ...

[schimmey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi. I still shoot with film but only have it processed to do all the scanning & post photo editing. I have just purchased Adobe Lightroom and am quite impressed. I have a lot of film to scan and wondering how others set up their process in terms of level of initial scan.

 

I have been scanning film at a 6x4 size saved to tiff with no other extras (apart from white balance and infrared to ensure removal of dust etc.) with the view that I will then be able to go through the set to determine which negatives are worth looking at further.

 

My question is is this the most effective way of managing the process? Or, should I look at scanning the negative once and do everything then and there in terms of getting a digital negative? I am starting to think this second option is preferable because I am finding that many of my photo's are, to me, worth looking at further.

 

I realise that doing just one scan at full resolution etc will take more memory but that to me is secondary as even bigger hard drives become available.

 

What are your thoughts on this?

 

Thanks,

 

Paul

[archi4]

Paul,

I don't know which scanner you use; I use a Nikon 8000.

I scan with no adjustments at all at the maximum resolution and save as a tiff using Nikon scan 4 software. (I also tried saving as a "RAW" file using Vuescan but the results were no better)

All adjustments are then done in Lightroom and the results are absolutely excellent.

maurice

[adan]

On the original question:

 

IMHO, be somewhat selective in what you scan and then scan at full resolution*. A loupe and lightbox can weed out misfocused shots or missed moments. The scanning software preview can also show you if some images just don't get there - no reason you can't preview an image, and then just skip doing a full scan and move on to a "better" image. If in doubt, scan it - you can always trash the picture later if, on consideration, it was not a "keeper".

 

(Doing at least a preview is probably a good idea for color negs, since it will let you judge the picture as a positive, with a first approximation of the real colors).

 

IMHO, it's a good idea to do some rough adjustments at the scanning stage so that you get the "best" 16 bits available from the image. Color balance, and black and white points that just "kiss" the ends of the histogram without clipping.

 

Nikon scanning software can save scans as Nikon raw (.nef files - same format their digital cameras use) - which also allows for some non-destructive adjusting via Lightroom.

 

*When I started out scanning film, I made small scans because the Coolscan 10 of the day was s-o-o slow. By the time I got to a Nikon 5000ED, it could scan 4000 ppi faster than the 10 could do 1000 dpi.

[wparsonsgisnet]

You might like to look at VueScan from hamrick.com. This offers you many features to improve your scans, including multiple scans. Ed Hamrick said that 4 scans provides the best overall digital image with regard to dynamic range.

[skunkworks]

For a client of mine that shoots huge amounts of film, I make a digital contact sheet by arranging the negatives on a flatbed scanner and scanning at 100% and 400 lpi. The result when viewed on a monitor is a good approximation to a hard contact sheet when viewed through a loupe. I can quickly scan many rolls, the file size is manageable, and I have an archive of all the shots on each roll.

[bokelley]

You might like to look at VueScan from hamrick.com. This offers you many features to improve your scans, including multiple scans. Ed Hamrick said that 4 scans provides the best overall digital image with regard to dynamic range.

 

I use a Nikon 5000 ED that I have come to appreciate the digital ICE feature for color slides and negatives. Do you know if there is there a way to meld the ICE function with the VueScan software?

 

Brock