Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] IMG: Young Mam Boy

Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: Young Mam Boy
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2012 17:26:50 -0500
Now that you've mentioned HDR and Silverfast I recall that you've stated 
before that that's the way you work.  I have no experience with your 
scanning method.  I also don't have an Eizo screen.  But I can say the 
the histogram for the boy's hand shows that much of the shadow area is 
pure black and it cannot be adjusted by the brightness control.  I 
suspect you must be visually much more forgiving of the dark shadows 
than I am.  But if you like it and it appears as reality to you then you 
should ignore my comments.

Chuck Norcutt


On 11/7/2012 2:15 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
> Thanks, Chuck.  I'm scanning with Silverfast and doing two exposure HDR
> scans.  They come out very dark and contrasty naturally but contain all of
> the information available in the slide.  The Kodachrome target is pretty
> accurate.  I just don't see that in the shadows of the boy's hand.  On my
> calibrated Eizo screen the shadows are soft and not black at all.  I'll
> admit that they look over saturated but that's the way I see the color in
> Guatemala.  I'll try to restrain myself and dial the saturation into the
> negative on the next one just for comparison.
>
> Tina
>
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> wrote:
>
>> A big improvement over the previous "Kids in caps" but still
>> oversaturated and, I think, still a bit too much contrast.  Note in
>> particular:  This appears to be soft, moderately bright daylight but
>> soft enough that it is not casting any strong shadows.  Now look at the
>> boy's hand at right.  Half of the skin tones have gone to black or
>> nearly so.  That just shouldn't be the case in this light.
>>
>> Can you show us an original scan with no adjustments?  Maybe the scanner
>> is set to produce too much contrast to begin with.  If a scan is too
>> dark or contrasty it can be difficult to recover what should be there.
>> A good scan will, if anything, be (like an expose to the right digital
>> image) a bit too bright but not have any blown highlights.  One can back
>> the brightness down and increase contrast... but it's much more
>> difficult to make significant corrections in the opposite direction.
>>
>> Finally, you should be working in 16 bits during adjustments.  8 bits is
>> enough to cover the dynamic range of a printed image but does not
>> contain enough tonal detail to maintain tonal separation during major
>> brightness/contrast editing.  You can go back to 8 bits when the editing
>> is done.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>>
>> On 11/6/2012 2:32 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
>>> PESO:
>>>
>>> We drove 30 minutes, waited in line 45 minutes and drove back home 30
>>> minutes this morning but we voted!!!  Hope you did.
>>>
>>> Now I'm processing more scans.  Clarity seems to make a big difference
>> and
>>> I'm backing off more on these Kodachrome, contrasty scans.
>>>
>>> http://www.pbase.com/image/147189757
>>>
>>> C&C greatly appreciated.  I couldn't do this without all of the help and
>>> advice I receive here!
>>>
>>> Tina
>>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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