Guest imported_stefan_r Posted September 14, 2006 Share #21 Posted September 14, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) excuse me, no PS work in the word would save this underexposed picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 14, 2006 Posted September 14, 2006 Hi Guest imported_stefan_r, Take a look here Re-energizing Supergirl. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wide.angle Posted September 14, 2006 Author Share #22 Posted September 14, 2006 The slide isn't underexposed, Stefan, at least on the light table, so doesn't need saving. It does need protection from me when scanned! I broke down and bought an IT8 slide to calibrate my scanner today. It was for Kodak film, and I shoot Fuji, but hopefully I'll get much closer. Hagen, on my crappy monitor at work, it seems you have a look similar to what I want. I'll check again when I get home. What is Photoshop Duplex Mode? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 14, 2006 Share #23 Posted September 14, 2006 scot, get silverfast if u want to work seriously with film. sorry - there is no other way, unless u have 15,000 scanner :-))) then u will need no silverfast at all :-))))) check out if there is support for your scanner fo course. i can use it as full scanner software, or u can use it as scanner driver+processor, and then u will create RAW data from your scanner driver and then process it with slverfast anytime and anyway u wish. about kodak and fuji - it doesnt metter much. i also use usually the fuji provia, but what u calibrate is not the film but the light sourse of your scanner, so both will work well - the important thing is to teach the siftware how your scanner sees colors actualy. stefan....... from what i see from the orignal scan scot posted.... the slide sdoesnt seem onderexposed or over. it is just a bad scan and alot of flare in the picture. scan can be improved when u know how to scan slides. flare can be improved either by ovoiding it or by having noctilux or summilux 50aasph (good ewxposure is still needed):-)))) a good slide that takes flare more essily is either kodak epp100 or astia fuji 100. provia is ok too for most of the cases - but again - good exposure in those cases is essintial. one trick - use a little lens tilt, see the reults and u will see at what agnles the flare is more pronounced. it is amaing how a little change in angle of light rays that come onto the lens will improve the photo.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 14, 2006 Share #24 Posted September 14, 2006 The last remix is awesome... what's the procedure for that one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide.angle Posted September 15, 2006 Author Share #25 Posted September 15, 2006 Ok, I used the IT8 with Vuescan (I wanted to see how this would do before buying Silverfast), rescanned and got this, which looks much closer to the slide... Let me know what you think. Next... how to make a good B/W and sepia from this (well, the large image)? Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/4427-re-energizing-supergirl/?do=findComment&comment=50376'>More sharing options...
wide.angle Posted September 15, 2006 Author Share #26 Posted September 15, 2006 Here is my attempt at a black/white with sepia, which I made by making the black and white using "channel mixer" and then the sepia by using "selective color" and adjusting the cyan and yellow values for the "white" and "gray" channels/colors. Did this give a good sepia color? The whole process moving the sliders seemed very arbitrary. Is there any science to this? Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/4427-re-energizing-supergirl/?do=findComment&comment=50404'>More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 15, 2006 Share #27 Posted September 15, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) hi scott... about silverfast... if u make primerly silde films... if u are pleased with the results on the viewscan, then u can stay with it. remember - silverfast in full mode (including driver software processor and soft proof for complete color management will cost above 1000$, so it is a bit of investemnt, although if u dont want everything than u can do it with about 250$). is this only a scan or photoshop work on it??? it looks a little like getting htrough photoshop. about sepia... well, what is sepia... it is a long story. it is a very rich process, in the darkroom. what automatic stuff on computer do with it (like on aperture, lightrooom, i-photo) it is more a kind of joke and not sepia:-)) if u want to make a high quality print - those are the steps.... make your 48bit. convert to b/w not via 16bit monochrom conversion, but via "channel mixer". open channle mixer in photoshop, check the little box on monochrom. now u will have b/w photo. now... u have three channels - red, green blue. for first experiments, i would suggest to put all the sliders on 33%. just to start with for the first times. now move the slider, one at time and see how the photo will look like. i suppose because of the face u will need more red to be there (say 60%). reduce the green now, and maybe add some blue. see how u reach the "look" u want. then get back to the mormal stuff - especially the cureves. next - adjust temp, or adjust alternativly white point color balance. this will give some toning. another good way is to put the processed file from photoshop (after channel mixer and curves) into i-photo or aperture, and then make the sepeia there. then imidiatly afer that make "fade color". of course 48bit files. another good way is to use apples image core filters. it is fantastic. make "false colors" and then adjust the black and the white tones via the wheel or the classic apple color sliders. after this u may want to make addition fine tune to make the image finer... i suggest using another core image filter - "shrapen luminosity". bellow is one more example a bit more sofisticated, whith more modern look of sepia. it is a little too saturated for my taste, but good to see the effect. this is more like the modern true sepias in the darkrrom, like working with fotospeed 3 step sepia which gives inormous control. u can bleach at the amont u want, u can addative it at whatever amount u want and u achieve a really strong image and not the fante kitchy sepias :-)) Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/4427-re-energizing-supergirl/?do=findComment&comment=50405'>More sharing options...
biglouis Posted September 15, 2006 Share #28 Posted September 15, 2006 Hmmm. I like 'em all but I particularly like the colour shot. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 15, 2006 Share #29 Posted September 15, 2006 Pictographics iCorrect, plus a bit of PS adjustment. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/4427-re-energizing-supergirl/?do=findComment&comment=50926'>More sharing options...
wide.angle Posted September 15, 2006 Author Share #30 Posted September 15, 2006 Wow, Brent. I didn't even realize that my calibrated version still had a color cast until I saw yours. I should just sent my slides to one of you guys. In the meantime, I'll keep learning on this steep curve. (Regretfully, I should have practiced more and became better at all this calibration, scanning, etc before scanning 1000s of slides. Guess I'll just eventually pick out the creme of them when I have time and ignore rescans on the rest). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_stefan_r Posted September 16, 2006 Share #31 Posted September 16, 2006 her eyes are still flat and death.... it is nice to see what PS is able to do. you dont need all that if you expose your pictures the right way. photographers today are becoming PS artists. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 16, 2006 Share #32 Posted September 16, 2006 about phitosjop arists... defenetly... if one wants to be photograph he/she should devide the role of his camera work with the work of photoshop. master the photoshop in order to get highest quality in post processing, but dont mix it with mastering the camera work (the work of photography). wether it is exposure problem or flare problem, master it. stefan - do u make scans from film??? man, when i was with kodak (their pro digital department is here in israel), i was amazed about how high are digital post processing level today (of course kodak is on he edge of the best). but with it i also saw that it is a real "science". to get from perfect slide on light table to perfect scan of it - it is simply science. here where a real mastery needed. think about it this way.... watch your slide or your b/w film on good light table. it must look amazing usually, rite?. now watch it differenetly - not on good light table, on white wall, on sun, on flourecent light, on tungsten light etc etc... it is just the same..... to bring your scanner device and its software to the condition that it gives u the output as on good light table. if your scanning arrangement is not capable of it (or the person is not capable to bring it to that), u simply cannot trust what u see. so, when i see scott's scan - i just dont trust what i see. maybe it is ok, maybe it is bad, may be only flare, maybe maybe...... i will take a "perfect slide", to avoid any mistakes.. a slide from studio with lights etc (they need only very good scan, very little fine tuning is needed afterwords)... no problems, with un-calibrated system, it is garanteed that u will make junk of that slide. take your b/w film, insert it in enlarger in darkrrom. get a 75w lamp, or reduce the ND filter - can u still make 30x40 good print???? even full magenta will not be enough usually. use old fante developer - do u still make good sexy looking prints in the darkroom??? it is just like that. there are some things one should know about digital post processing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uulrich Posted September 16, 2006 Share #33 Posted September 16, 2006 It's nice to see how much time and effoert you put into it to help us in this 'make it web ready race'. Her's a good place to listen and to learn. I like it here and appreciate the way how things are being discussed. Thanks pals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainer_p Posted September 16, 2006 Share #34 Posted September 16, 2006 ....and one more time....I have to totally agree with Stefan Rohner. the original is far underexposed and all your manips show in fact the impossibility making this a good photo. On the other hand those are good news as real photography isn't dead yet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest evita Posted September 16, 2006 Share #35 Posted September 16, 2006 ... there are some things one should know about digital post processing. yes, Victor, since we present our pictures on the net something about digital post process we need to know, but that's not the question here. An underexposed negative will remain one, if there's no light there will be none, even if you build in pixels, when you print it (or let it print), the eyes will remain dead. I agree with Rainer above! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 16, 2006 Share #36 Posted September 16, 2006 my god stefan, rainer, evita.... stefan said about the exposure something, rite?? i fully agree with him - i mean fully. PHOTOGRAPHY = DO IT WITH CAMERA, COMPOSE, REACT, EXPOSE ETC. i just added that when the SCAN is not done on fully CALIBRATED SYSTEM - i simply do not trust what i see. that means = I HAVE "NO IDEA" HOW THE SLIDE FILM LOOKS ON THE LIGHT TABLE. now, what is fully calibrated system??? it is = $$$$$$$$$ + KNOWLEDGE. and FIRST OF ALL, it needed not in order to SAVE BAD PHOTO, but in order to make from GOOD PHOTO (exposure compo etc) a GOOD OUTPUT. also i said... as much as FILM PHOTOGRAPHY needs DARKROOM SKILLS, just the same with digital work. it has nothing to do with internet - internet is joke, junk... im talking about real post processing on fully calibrated systems (devices, softwares etc) = MAKING READY DIGITAL FILE FOR SERIOUS PRINT. is it more clear now????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainer_p Posted September 16, 2006 Share #37 Posted September 16, 2006 ...what is really clear vic, is the fact that even with all the afterwork you did to this shot, it just didn't get better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest evita Posted September 16, 2006 Share #38 Posted September 16, 2006 is it more clear now????? YES, IT IS MORE CLEAR... but it is still a fact that if the negative is good, all of what you've written isn't needed to make a good print Oh, I still agree with Rainer above Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic vic Posted September 16, 2006 Share #39 Posted September 16, 2006 rainer... does anything from what i said or what i did changed the original bad scan that additionally was tiny and additionally was in 24bit color???? i have made a few steps as recomendation to scott - demostration of some workflow. once the system is calibrated, something can be done with good file (48bit HDR file). it will be even great (from technical point of view) if the slide itslef is good from the first place. one thing is clear - read clearly :-))))))) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainer_p Posted September 16, 2006 Share #40 Posted September 16, 2006 ....vic, you fly far to high for me. I can and want not to follow you technically. it is true that I didn't read all you wrote and actually I only gave my opinion about a manipulated photo and if I judge by the avatars, you are not the photographer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.