Herm <hermperez@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> >The 'White Point' seems to be important, Ed wrote me a similar
> >mail, he suggested 0.001% (One quick test yesterday was far better
> >than the grainy, partly over-exposed scans I did before). It was
> >probably the only setting I had not yet tried.
> Yes, play with that.. just use the scan memory button and examine
> the results in Photoshop.. you want a histogram that is not clipped
> anywhere..
The 'Levels' Tools in Photoshop turned out to be helpful, but the real
killer was the 'multi-pass' option Vuescan offers! I usually scan 8
times now, and the image quality is greatly improved. Not yet to a
level where I would jump in the air, but it's getting better.
> Did you check out my website?
I did, quiet nice!
> I use a lot of E200 for astro photography. I will assume the
> original slides or negs are not overexposed and something is messed
> up in the scan.
The slides are ok, they look good on a wall: I.e. NGC7000 is visible,
the 'Mexican Bay' is clearly visible.
> There is no exposure time adjustment possible with the Scanwit, what
> are you fiddling with?..
I try to set the exposure time. No idea what it does to the scans. Is
everybody sure that it does nothing?
> perhaps you have set the "brightness" setting too high.. normally I
> set it between 1 to 2, mostly 1.5 with semi dark slides.
I just keep it at 1, but that would be another thing to play with,
I'll try.
> If you want send me a screen capture of the histogram of one of your
> slides.. plus a copy of the Vuescan ini file with the settings you
> used.
Thanks for the offer. For the time being, I'll try some more fiddling
with the parameters. I'm still far away from knowing what I do.
--
Jan Exner · exner@gmx.net · 0x9E0D3E98 ·
"Zicke Zacke - Hühnerkacke"
Aktionsfront gegen pseudo-intellektuelle Signaturen
