Levels, curves and saturation should bring the image up to speed, and a
gamma "punch" from calibrated monitor settings to the PCs 2.5 gamma default
and sRGB should do the rest. Try using LAB color too to adjust the tone -
see LAB Correction by Dan Margulis at
and especially The Magic of Lab Color Space by Michael Cervantes at
I'm an amateur but if you like send me an image - I'll see what I can do and
try to capture the screen shots of adjustments made and track the
particulars (it may take a couple of days - I have my regular employment to
attend to).
Maris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Sharp" <jsharp@illicom.net>
To: <filmscanners@halftone.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Color saturation with Vuescan
| Maris
|
| Agreed on the budget printers. Blown out highlights and no shadow detail.
|
| Still, even comparing my scans to good quality digital cameras like the
Nikon 990 leaves me dissapointed when viewing them on screen. My scans are
sharper, which is not surprising given the resolution difference, but again,
they just don't seem to have the color I guess I'm used to, or that people
(clients) want to see.
|
| I'm trying to determine if I've missed something, just haven't learned
enough yet, or am expecting too much from the setup I have. It's hard to
accept that an $500 digital camera can give better results when the output
is for the web...
|
| --
| Jim
|
|
|
| ---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
| From: "Maris V. Lidaka, Sr." <mlidaka@ameritech.net>
| Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
| Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 09:33:13 -0600
|
| >I think what the low-budget photo printers must do is set the black and
| >white points of the image well inside their normal settings, losing
detail
| >in highlights and shadows.
| >
| >The best I could recommend is a lot of sweat continuing to practice
working
| >with levels and curves in Photoshop.
| >
| >Maris
|
