Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] Re: 2 vuescan questions
- To: lexa@lexa.ru
- Subject: [filmscanners] Re: 2 vuescan questions
- From: "" <HMSDOC@aol.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:05:15 EDT
- Unsubscribe: mailto:listserver@halftone.co.uk
I have found the same..what I tend to do is to take the 16 bit scan into PS
and use levels on it to push the sliders in to near the black and white points
but leaving room on both sides to get it 'closer' and then converting to 8 bit
and then using adjustment layers from there on to get things just right.
Howard
<< Some people in the recent discussion on 8 vs. 16 bits have mentioned the
histograms in vuescan. In my experience, the preview histogram is not very
useful for what I would have thought was a primary use: setting the
whitepoint and blackpoint. For example, if I adjust these points so that the
histogram stretches almost all the way across the graph, I find that the
scan image has black in it, as indicated by turning on the switches to show
black and white areas. In short, the preview histogram looks right, but the
scan doesn't; and I haven't found empirically a way of reliably fudging the
blackpoint adjustment. The default blackpoint is zero, I believe (I'm not at
the machine that has Vuescan); but using it seems to leave a lot of "space"
on the left, at least according to the histogram. This occurs on slides that
are properly exposed, both visually and according to the histogram (i.e., no
unintended areas of black or blown-out highlights. Am I doing something
wrong? Should I just go with the defaults? >>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
|