Marta Wojtkowska

Marta Wojtkowska

Posted on 07/27/2013


Photo taken on July 13, 2013



See also...

.film.forever. .film.forever.


Olympus Rangefinder Olympus Rangefinder


Rangefinder Photography Rangefinder Photography


I shoot Fuji I shoot Fuji


i-Central i-Central


See more...

Keywords

color
Pro 400H
Pro400H
Fujifilm
Fujicolor
XA
Olympus XA
Olympus
135
Fujicolor Pro 400H


Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
All rights reserved

414 visits

***

***
I am trying to improve (and automate) the process of scanning my color negatives.
Not much luck till now :(

-----
Olympus XA + Fujicolor Pro 400H

Anna Anastasio, Marieschen, Trond Solem and 2 other people have particularly liked this photo


15 comments - The latest ones
baie.bleue
baie.bleue
I use Vuescan with a similar scanner from Canon. Although Vuescan works better than the shipped software it still blows out my highlights with 'auto level' as does Photoshop. Digital processing is challenging!
5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to baie.bleue
It certainly is!
5 years ago.
Clint Hudson
Clint Hudson
Very nice
5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to Clint Hudson
Thank you, Clint :)
5 years ago.
Eduardo Romero
Eduardo Romero
Have you tried tweaking the RGB channels during scanning? For each channel drag the triangles outward so that they are placed just beyond the edges of the color data. It will look kind of flat but you can add contrast later in post. That's the way I pre-process my images.
5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to Eduardo Romero
Yes, Eduardo.
This is exactly what I usually do (adjusting the scanning space for actual histogram for every channel). But it is so tiresome and results are so unreliable!
5 years ago.
Eduardo Romero
Eduardo Romero
Some films are harder than others. Perhaps you can try Kodak Ektar and Portra. I've seen your Fuji 160s shots and they look very nice.
5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to Eduardo Romero
Kodak Ektar is the hardest one (for me and my equipment). I gave it up!
But I recently bought some Portas for a change :)
Fuji 160S was the best!
Fuji 160NS is so good :(
5 years ago.
François Collard
François Collard
I wonder whether automating scans is possible; negatives are too different.
I use two scanners: Plustek Opticfilm 7200i, which is very accurate, but emphasizes dust and scratches even more than the image. The infrared dust and scratch correction does not work for all films. It nearly needs new settings for each negative.
The Epson Perfection V500 Photo produces less crisp images, but with fewer blemishes. It can scan several images at once. the quality is not as good, but scanning with it is not an ordeal like with the Plustek. Here is a sample.
5 years ago. Edited 5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to François Collard
You are absolutely right - negatives are different and one should account for it.
And your observations are very similar to mine!
Thank you for sharing :)
5 years ago.
François Collard has replied to Marta Wojtkowska
Processing negatives is not such difficult. But scanning is not a very interesting job: all I think most of the time when doing that is getting the best digital archive I can and never having to bring out the original again...
The link to the V500 sample did not work. The online editor of Ipernity does not work properly, and if you notice an erroneous link then correct it, the previous version re-appears instead of the correct one. The link is www.ipernity.com/doc/francois_collard/15081963
(But maybe only a copy in my browser cache was not modified and obstinately reappeared when I refreshed the page).
5 years ago. Edited 5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to François Collard
I hate scanning my negatives :( Some of them I leave unscanned at all - I do not put much faith in digital storage media ;)
5 years ago.
François Collard has replied to Marta Wojtkowska
I hate scanning,but I'm more confident in digital storage than in any other (not on hard disks, that will necessarily die), provided the CD, DVD or Blu-Ray where I store my photos, programs or documents are checked, say, every five years, and at least copied twice. I have had a CD burner since 1997 (then DVD, then Blu-Ray burners). Nearly all disks I burned are still legible. When there are read errors they are often due to my bad handling of the burner at the beginning, sometimes the quality of the media (which is seldom linked with the reputation of its brand: on the contrary, reputed brands often do dangerous innovations that may endanger your data).
Hard disks are comfortable, and I even added recently to my computer a 2Tb internal drive for my photos and videos, but I don't consider it a real digital storage, just a way to have my files at hand. But I noticed that few people stored their files on optical disks. They often lack the basics of disc burning. Even my 37-year daughter, who is very comfortable with computers, asks me when she wants to burn even a simple audio CD. I suppose burning discs went out of fashion, and people are too confident in hard disks and pen drives.
5 years ago.
Marta Wojtkowska has replied to François Collard
I am an oldfashioned girl ;) so I still use CDs to make my backups ... lots of them ;D
5 years ago.