stunsworth Posted May 10, 2013 Share #21  Posted May 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I had a Minolta Multi Pro scanner and it was very sharp, so sharp it would scan just a layer of grain at it's highest resolution which isn't very good because it just looked like grain and the image was lost  Viewed at 100% perhaps, but who looks at any photograph at that resolution?  The Nikon V that I have can resolve grain, but zoom out and there's a photograph not just grain.  When I did darkroom photography the device I used to focus the enlarger showed grain quite clearly. Again, the printed photos looked fine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Hi stunsworth, Take a look here Vuescan Help. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mike Rawcs Posted May 11, 2013 Author Share #22 Â Posted May 11, 2013 Good scan, Philip. Steve, "it would scan just a layer of grain at it's highest resolution which isn't very good because it just looked like grain and the image was lost". This is what I find with my 5400 scanner; it finds every blemish and defect too! Â Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted May 11, 2013 Share #23 Â Posted May 11, 2013 I've never heard of that happening. It almost sounds as if you had dust and scratch removal switched on - which won't of course work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted May 12, 2013 Author Share #24  Posted May 12, 2013 Viewed at 100% perhaps, but who looks at any photograph at that resolution? Steve, try it and you will see why it is not a good idea! Why do I do it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 14, 2013 Share #25  Posted May 14, 2013 Viewed at 100% perhaps, but who looks at any photograph at that resolution? The Nikon V that I have can resolve grain, but zoom out and there's a photograph not just grain.  When I did darkroom photography the device I used to focus the enlarger showed grain quite clearly. Again, the printed photos looked fine.  The Multi Pro, or it may be Minolta scanners in general, has a very narrow DOF and being a professional multi format scanner the focus is very accurate. When it scans film with conventional grain it picks out a part of the grain, I expect the layer nearest the lens. But conventional film grain is not flat, it is clumped in shape and spread in depth in the emulsion. So it didn't render films like FP4 very well, and which was/is my favourite. The scan would/could look like a veil of sharp grain because it wasn't picking up the depth of grain and therefore the full tonal range and the softer nature of the clumped grain. With Kodak T or Ilford Delta films it would work much better because the grain is flat and has no depth compared with FP4.  The accuracy of the Multi Pro was its curse, and I am only talking about subtle rendering that you can either like or dislike without it being either right or wrong in a universal sense. I have seen drum scans of the same negative that look similar to the Multi Pro scans, and they didn't do it for me either, the nature of the film is lost in the accuracy of the scanner. So my point in line with the conversation was that if all things are considered don't simply up the pixel count to try and find the best rendering the scanner can achieve, but work at its native resolution and use the more subtle tools in Photoshop or Lightroom to add pixels in up-sizing should it be necessary, and that more isn't necessarily better when scanning.  Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruniroquai Posted May 14, 2013 Share #26 Â Posted May 14, 2013 What about the Coolscan V, is not enought for 20x30 cm prints? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted May 14, 2013 Share #27 Â Posted May 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) What about the Coolscan V, is not enought for 20x30 cm prints? Â Easily good enough for that size of print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkathy Posted April 4, 2014 Share #28 Â Posted April 4, 2014 I hope to get advise from someone. I am scanning old pictures with VueScan to Raw (DNG). When I zoom the photo it looks horrible (squared). Possible I am doing something wrong with setting. Â Actually I also scanned into Tiff format and it is the same result. Â You can see the problem here: http://img23.binimage.org/1e/98/81/scan1.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 5, 2014 Share #29  Posted April 5, 2014 Welcome to the forum  What scanner are you using and at what resolution? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted April 5, 2014 Share #30 Â Posted April 5, 2014 I do not think that this texture has been produced by the scanner. Have you looked closely at the photograph, i.e. with a magnifying glass? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkathy Posted April 5, 2014 Share #31 Â Posted April 5, 2014 What scanner are you using and at what resolution? Fujitsu 6230 Â I do not think that this texture has been produced by the scanner. Have you looked closely at the photograph, i.e. with a magnifying glass? Â This problem appears on all photos. It looks that they have texture, but they do not have any. I did check them with a magnifying glass. Â Here is a sample in tiff format http://rghost.net/53789797 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 5, 2014 Share #32 Â Posted April 5, 2014 Are you scanning prints? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted April 5, 2014 Share #33 Â Posted April 5, 2014 The scan from you old picture looks like it may have been scanned at a very low resolution, but also it may be the case that dust removal or sharpening software is causing these artefacts, and it is always better to switch these off if you have used them. Â Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkathy Posted April 5, 2014 Share #34 Â Posted April 5, 2014 Are you scanning prints? Â Photos from album. Â The scan from you old picture looks like it may have been scanned at a very low resolution, but also it may be the case that dust removal or sharpening software is causing these artefacts, and it is always better to switch these off if you have used them. Â 300 / 600 / 1200 dpi - same result Filter - everything is Off. Here is Output settings http://funkyimg.com/i/GHrJ.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkathy Posted April 7, 2014 Share #35  Posted April 7, 2014 I still did not resolved the problem. I am saving now in TIFF file, but the result is the same. If I zoom it I see the "Basket-Weave Effect" (squares)  Here are my settings for Input and Output: http://img23.binimage.org/b6/1d/c5/inputoutput.jpg  Hopefully someone will be advice. Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted April 7, 2014 Share #36 Â Posted April 7, 2014 Try 2 things: set the bits per pixel to 48 instead (skipping the infrared) and click the Fine mode checkbox. Â And just in case switch the Raw Compression from Auto to None Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkathy Posted April 7, 2014 Share #37  Posted April 7, 2014 Try 2 things: set the bits per pixel to 48 instead (skipping the infrared) and click the Fine mode checkbox.  And just in case switch the Raw Compression from Auto to None  plasticman, you are my saviour!!! Thank you very much. I have tried all 3 of your recommendations together and separate. The problem was Fine mode checkbox. I was so frustrated with my scanner - fi-6230 and already ordered the new one - Canon. It will be delivered tomorrow. I will try with the new one as well. Thank you again!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.