Marvin wrote:
>Question: Does the same principle of "opening up the shadow details" work
>with scanned negatives? In asking this, I am aware of >the manipulations
>that can be done with shadow details with PhotoShop, et al....which are
>certainly easier to do than with the conventional >dodging techniques in
>photographic enlarging.
Someone else is going to answer this better than I can (I hope), but in my
(limited) experience, Photoshop's "Dodge" and "Burn" don't measure up to
what you can do with an enlarger--OTOH, maybe it's just that sense of
*accomplishment* you get when you do it on an enlarger! ;-)
I've found that Ed's Vuescan opens up shadow details very well, at least on
my Acer. I don't know *how* he does it, but I'm confident I could prove that
he does (please don't ask--it's a lot of work to *prove* something you
observe in one instant!). Deep shadows are another matter--without a
variable scan-rate, the Acer is handcuffed--but other scanners do in fact
have a variable scan rate. Of course, while pulling out the shadow detail,
they'll also burn out your highlights and much of the upper mid-range. :-)
At this point in time, Vuescan can't vary the scan in a selected problem
area like you'd do with *real* dodge and burn, or rubbing your thumb on the
print as you develop it; nor can any scanner or driver that I've heard of.
However, it's possible to make several scans of the same picture or frame
and piece them together, much more easily than you'd do with paper. It's
still a genuine PITA, but it works--you'd need to *really* want to save a
picture to do it, time-wise! Easier in Photoshop? Not really, IMHO, nor
significantly faster, all things considered. But it's different, and you
don't have to do it in the dark. PS also has an Undo, which is nice. Don't
have to do it over. ;-)
Best regards--LRA
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
