Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/05/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Good point, Christoph and definitely worth playing with. Adam On 5/14/06, Dr. Chippendale <dr.chippendale@kontakt-mit-linsen.com> wrote: > Adam Bridge wrote: > > So why use the scanner software at all and just do it in a tool > > designed for pixel manipulation: Photoshop? > > > > Yes, you can adjust the input curves in your scanning software, but > > that's no different than adjusting the curves in Photoshop. > > > > So lots of time spent scanning seems wasted - get the pixels in and > > then deal with them in Photoshop. > > > > I'm totally willing to be convinced this is wrong-thinking but you're > > going to have to demonstrate why this is the case. > > Adam, > > You raise exactly the point I was trying to make when I stated here > http://homepage.mac.com/chammann/foto/Personal35.html that I scan my B&W > negatives as positives. I think It does matter how you scan because, like > any digital recording medium (not different from a digital camera's > sensor), > a scanner puts the emphasis on the lower half of the light values (the > bottom half of the histogram). Values in the higher zones get less > differentiated. So yo get two different tonalities that can only be > modified > later on in Photoshop. > Case in point: same negative of a rock abstract, scanned as a positive: > http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/515678/display/5652501 > And scanned as a negative: > http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/cat/1758/display/5672679 > Excuse thew slightly different cropping. I prefer the tonality of the first > one. > Greetings, Christoph > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >