I took a shot at it with Photoshop (attached is a cropped and jpegged
version to fit in the 80k limit). It looks like the informtion is there, you
just have to work to bring it out. There was a very dark shadow on the left
of the sceen. Is there anything on the negative? If there is, I think there
must be something wrong with the scanner or the settings.
Jack Phipps
Applied Science Fiction
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave King [mailto:kingphoto@mindspring.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:29 AM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: Re: filmscanners: FW: Shadow detail & LS-4000
After having a quick look at your problem, I would suggest using
curves not levels for this type of "tough" lighting and contrast
range. If you are color managed with a calibrated monitor you could
do the correction in Nikonscan, if not output a high bit file to
Photoshop and do the corrections there.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: Fergus Hammond <FHammond@Adobe.COM>
To: <filmscanners@lists.cix.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:32 AM
Subject: filmscanners: FW: Shadow detail & LS-4000
> First, apologies if I've messed up posting to the list. I subscribed
a while
> ago and have just been reading. Looking back at the intro message
sent to
> me, there isn't a note on actually posting to the list.
>
> My question is regarding an LS-4000. I'm disappointed with the lack
of
> shadow detail in my scans. An example is
.
> This jpeg is a crop of a larger image, direct from the scanner
before any
> changes were made. It's not a wonderful photo but in the slide,
there is
> good shadow detail on the tree on the left side of the frame. In the
scan,
> the tree is just a big black shape. In general, I find that my scans
are
> very dark. My current workflow is to scan from NikonScan 3.0 (when
it
> doesn't crash!), then open the image in Photoshop. My understanding
is that,
> apart from the analog gain command and Digital Ice, the controls in
> NikonScan don't change how the scan is made but just modify the
results.
> Photoshop's Levels command helps somewhat but often, there's just no
details
> in the shadows.
>
> Suggestions? Am I just being unrealistic in my expectations?
>
> Regards,
> Fergus Hammond
> Adobe Systems Inc.
>
