Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] [IMG] first one with the 300mm f/4,5

Subject: Re: [OM] [IMG] first one with the 300mm f/4,5
From: Fernando Gonzalez Gentile <fgnzalez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:08:51 -0300
I'll try to figure out, and still not awake enough.

C.H. points out something I had learned from him before I had the chance 
to buy any film scanner.
So, I had been warned on this 'coolscan issue', I remember him telling 
what has just told, before buying it _used_(*).
Nonetheless, I can hardly see some on my 17" CRT monitor, in a 1280 .jpg.
I do see a lighter 'halo' in the full 112 MB .tiff, at 100%. And I'm not 
talking about a sharpening artifact - 'though it may be so since I had 
set sharpening in Nikon Scan 4, at Intensity: 30%, Halo: 15%, Threshold: 
1% (yes, 1% - not pixels ... ).
In my monitor, in any 16bit .tiff at 100% or over, I don't see 
sharpening artifacts as I was taught they look like, using these 
parameters' figures.
Then, I sharpened in CS3 using only Intellisharpen II at 0% halo (66%, 
33% fine detail),
but applied a little sharpen when resizing to 1280, using SI II, as 
Moose advised more than once.
If that 'issue' of the Coolscan is to be found, should be on the right 
border of the trunk, where lighter color stops and shadow begins, IMHO.

Perhaps, if I had a high quality LCD, I might be able to see this 
'contrast issue' of the 4000ED in a small 1280 .jpg.
So far I can only say it is noticeable for me at 100%.
You can find a similar situation in this one, done using the same 
scanner, but not done by me: 
<http://www.tope.nl/tope_show_entry.php?event=20&pic=4> -
At the time, I asked C.H. on this one and remember him telling some 
other causes for what you see around the building shinning in the night, 
at the middle of the small .jpg.

I think Ken is talking about something different, and in coincidence of 
what Carlos told me off list: Carlos called it 'flare', and Ken 'hazy 
look'.

When I looked at it in comparison to my previous scans, I noticed the same.
Ken was very effective and subtle I think: as said above (*), I always 
feared there was something wrong with this scanner, so much that I did 
clean its mirror, driven by frustration. With a clean mirror, only way 
to go was to learn better how to touch curves and levels, and this took 
me some months ... . I thought I had got it, but denied so while doing 
the first img. because I was disgusted by a red shift in the slightly 
outdated Velvia. When I saw the settings I had used, and looked at the 
slide (first time after doing the scan and uploading !!),
I started again from scratch, matching the transilluminated frame as 
closely as I could using levels, curves and lightness.
Did almost nothing in CS3 (very minor levels adjustment), set 
Intellisharpen to the same values and uploaded in aRGB (**).
Think I have corrected what Ken and Carlos pointed out, otherwise I 
should spend in a better monitor.

(**)It seems that I could change from aRGB to sRGB using ISII, but 
hadn't found how to do so yet.

Since the 'hazy look' has always bothered me, and cleaning the mirror 
takes some time and risk, I started a second scan after midnight - much 
more simple regarding color balance and correcting the red shift.
I'll post the link asap.

So, I went to sleep at 4 a.m. again :-(
Everything will have a hazy look today :-)
But I feel awake, after writing the above. Need only a cup of coffee. A 
big one !.

Thanks for looking, Chuck.
-- I did found a tiny bit of purple chroma where expected to be, but I 
won't tell ....

Fernando.

Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I'm afraid I don't see any "haze" and have no idea what y'all are 
> carryin' on about.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> C.H.Ling wrote:
>   
>> Yes, hazy is still there, 4000ED is famous for flare, I believe the problem 
>> is due to the poor lens system. I had lots of hard time in scanning high 
>> contrast slides. I remember a worse case was a lady wearing black fur 
>> standing beside a white car under the sun, film was Kodakchrome 64. The 
>> slide itself looked very nice and clean but the scan had lots of white 
>> diffused to the black fur, it took me lots of time to touch up the scan with 
>> PS. I sent the scanner to N*kon for through cleaning, they did charged me 
>> for that but there was zero improvement.
>>
>> C.H.Ling
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Fernando Gonzalez Gentile"
>>
>>     
>>> It's here:
>>>
>>> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/3703345338/>
>>>
>>> link to 1280, link to view on black.
>>>
>>> Still hazy !?
>>> Disassembling and cleaning the mirror is not that terrible. Problem is
>>> to assemble the mirror back into place.
>>> I think that when I did so on May 2008, it fitted somehow twisted, and
>>> the crop never draws exactly on the border of the plastic slide's frame 
>>> :-(
>>>
>>> Fernando.
>>>
>>> Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I may begin by ruling out an error made by a newbie.
>>>> Specially when the wannabe photographer starts doing a scan too late at
>>>> night and finishes it at 4 am ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Adjusted levels, curves and lightness, and right now the slide has been
>>>> fed into the 4000ED.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I saw what you had seen: I adjusted those parameters wrong, for a
>>>> start. Certainly things worsened when doing highlights/shadows.
>>>>
>>>> I was not too happy with a red shift of the Velvia, this issue biased my
>>>> judgement.
>>>>
>>>> Scanning has finished, shall upload soon.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you !
>>>>
>>>> Fernando.
>>>>         


-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz