Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/12/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]<two for one reply :-) > Daniel Riding wrote: > > That probably wasn't the original scan, was it? It was a JPG file, not > a tiff. I hope you are scanning to tiff. Well of course I meant the original scan then shrink to a reasonable size, convert to sRGB and then "Save As Web" :-) Normally I scan to TIFF using Vuescan. For this roll, I wasn't sure what they would look like, and honestly speaking, I have some doubts about a 70s old lens, so I scanned to JPG to save time (to process the files) and space. Hmmm... may be one factor is that I was prepare the pictures to be not so great because of the old lens, and they exceed my expectation, so my thinking became that they are better than they really are. OTOH, when I show them to you folks, you folks do not have the expectations and they look as they are... Sonny Carter wrote: >You obviously think I meant that as a character trait, but I did not >intend it so. I was referring to the sloppiness that we all get when we >don't take one more step to make our work a little bit better each day. Ah yes, the last 20% that takes 80% of the time :-) >You are right there is something terribly wrong with your workflow to >produce a scan that dirty. Probably undisolved solids somewhere along >the way. Are you using photoflow at the end? How clean is the dryer? Definitely photoflow. Most rolls are not THAT bad. I would say on average may be 1/4 of each roll has some spots, may be about 1/4 what's on that scan. This roll though, almost all pictures look like that. My guess is that the bucket where I do the photoflow rinse wasn't cleaned thoroughly. In throwing money at problems, I just ordered a film washer. From what I gather with other people's work flow, with that, I should be able to eliminate the Stop Bath step. Also, then I can use running water for the final wash instead of using the Jobo. May be this will help. >Anyhow, back to the point, I took seven minutes with your scan in >Photoshop, and here's what I came up with: > >http://www.sonc.com/richards_wife.htm Thank you. A bit aggressive on the blurring on the back of the head, but the contrast is quite decent. I suppose this does mean that there is information there. // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please use richard at imagecraft.com)