Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] IMGS: FLASH!! vs No Flash

Subject: Re: [OM] IMGS: FLASH!! vs No Flash
From: Tina Manley <images@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 17:49:33 -0500
Yes, that is how I use the Polaroid D&S - painting it in where needed.

I will try the other suggestions for noise removal and grain additions.  I
just don't like the plastic look that most noise removal programs give me.

Thanks,

Tina


On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2/21/2014 12:14 PM, Tina Manley wrote:
> > But that's what I don't like!  I don't want smooth and smeary looking.
>
> Ah, that's not what you said. "I will be glad when software can reduce the
> grain but not soften the image!"
>
> If you look at the actual few areas with detail, it is retained, as asked
> for.
>
> It looks 'smooth' because there is very little actual detail in the film.
> As to smeary, I think it's the same thing; you
> want some grain. If you look at the printing and her silhouetted hair,
> they are as detailed or more as the original.
>
> > I would like the look of film but without pebble-sized grain.
>
> I'm not seeing this kind of effect in some of your other TMAX 400 shots.
> Here, for example, there's decent detail and
> the original grain has nicely retained its size relative to the image. A
> little bit of grain to add texture and a film
> look. All rather nice. <http://www.pbase.com/image/141811236>
>
> It looks like this particular image had wildly underexposed shadow areas.
> <
> http://tinamanley.smugmug.com/Central-America/Honduras/Honduras/3917411_sWqp63#%21i=1213147304&k=sdXz2CS&lb=1&s=L
> >
>
> Pulling them up has revealed lots of scanner noise, which you are
> incorrectly identifying as film grain. Look, and you
> will see that there is almost no 'grain' in the bright areas, and lots of
> noise in the dark areas. Perhaps some advice
> from AG and/or CH on scanner/software settings might help? Or there may
> just be nothing there on the neg.
>
> It seems what you really want is to change the scanner noise into film
> grain, I don't know any way other than to clear
> up the original noise and add back simulated grain. <
> http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/Manley/Homework.htm>
>
> This is far from perfect; I'm not going to do all the edges and subtleties
> carefully on a small JPEG. But it should give
> an idea what I'm talking about. I could have retained the film grain in
> the bright areas, but then it wouldn't match
> that in the shadow areas, where noise has been removed and grain added
> back. I particularly needed consistent grain
> across faces, going from originally clean bright areas to originally noisy
> areas.
>
> There are several steps and choices in the process, so many different
> results could be reached.
>
> I did try the idea Chuck (and others?) proposed, of adding back grain
> using PS. There are very few choices in that tool
> and even Gaussian distribution looked artificial to me. I used
> PerfectEffects, B&W, None, TMAX 400 grain, 50/50, which
> looks much more like film grain to me.
>
> > NeatImage just looks smeary to me.
>
> As above, that's a matter of taste; you want the appearance of film and
> the illusion of detail that noise/grain add. I
> don't think you will find an NR program that specifically reduces noise
> and replaces it with grain.
>
> > My favorite dust and scratch remover is the old
> > Polaroid Dust and Scratch Remover but it only works in 32 bit PS so I
> keep
> > a 32 bit PS on my computer just for that one program.  It removes dust
> > without smearing but doesn't remove the grain.
>
> Again, you mentioned nothing about dust and scratch removal. That is not
> what any of the NR programs are designed to do,
> so of course they don't give you the results you want. I tried that long
> ago; no go.
>
> For sliver B&W film, I don't know of any really good solution other than
> great care to clean negs and hand spotting,
> annoying and time consuming as it is.
>
> Since you pointed me to the Polaroid plug-in, I've played with it a bit,
> and not been much impressed. Finding settings
> that clean up the D&Ss without adversely affecting image detail is tricky
> and not always possible.
>
> I can only see using it as a layer to paint in on specific areas. It can
> be amazing on low detail areas like sky. Here,
> settings that clean up the sky perfectly destroy huge amounts of detail in
> the landscape.
> <
> http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/BSwale/Home2_dipton-srp15-1200px.htm
> >
>
> Selectively Grainy Moose
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
>


-- 
Tina Manley
http:// <http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
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