Alan W wrote:
>On slides it's mostly a moot point unless they are underexposed. <clip>
>Also Kodachrome is a denser slide generally, which can drop shadows too low
for many scanners to distinguish properly.
I've found that my Scanwit 2720S does a really good job on well-exposed
slides and negs, and is almost flawless with landscapes. But the biggest
problem area in *both* media is where the dynamic range is wide, e.g. in
bright sunlight or near water (especially on negs), or the subject in
partial or full shadow with the background in full sun, which in
dynamic-range terms amounts to underexposure and overexposure in the same
shot and produces serious "noise" with slides and negs alike. Since I'm
archiving, I can't control the subject or the lighting with subsequent
shoots, and I *really* hate to lose a good subject-picture, however
imperfect.
I'm gradually learning how to compensate/retouch for this using Photoshop
and Micrografx PP8 (both have good facilities, and the suitability of one
over the other often depends on the picture/problem)--this is generally (for
me) the scanner equivalent of bracketing 2 or 3 "exposures" and combining
the best elements with complicated cut&paste.
The problem remains with the "noise" from dense areas in slides and thin
areas in negs (shadow areas, all). Sometimes I think I should have stuck
with my painting, where I can do it any dam way I want to--I s'pose I'm
spoiled! ;-)
But seriously, how are other users handling this problem?
Best regards--LRA
-----------------------------------------------
FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com
Reserve your name now at
