On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:52:45 -0500, Provencher, Paul M. wrote:
>I have just purchased this scanner and wonder if the shortcomings I
>encountered are typical:
>
>- problems homing in on a basic setting for scanning negatives (can't seem
>to get a combination of film type and other settings that yields a good scan
>(transparencies seem to scan quite well, although not as good as more
>expensive scanners)
I'm scanning negs with mine right now. I simply set the scanner to
scan at 36 bits and do a raw scan into photoshop. Once there I do a
level adjustment on each channel separately (red, green & blue) setting
the "white" and "black" points on the input levels to just where the
graph starts to rise. I then adjust the midtones on the blue channel
to get correct skin tones (normally around 0.80). then adjust the red
and green midtones and a final tweek to the blue midtones and then an
RGB (all channels at once) tweek to get the contrast right.
After a bit of practice it's quite quick and as I have used a vast
range of films over the years I can't find a setting that works for all
of them. the only film I have had problems scanning was a very cheap
film labeled "Cannon Power" and is without a doubt the worst film ever
made.
>- software supplied with the scanner is difficult to use
The latest software version is 2.39 and can be downloaded from their
website. Make sure you turn off auto-gamma, it's a truely useless
feature. As mentioned above all i do is basically scan as is in 36
bits and do the adjustments in photoshop. If your image software wont
do levels for individual channels then try GIMP for windows (assuming
you are a windows person) which can be downloaded here
http://user.sgic.fi/~tml/gimp/win32/
It's a bit slower than photoshop but has nearly all the same features
and it's free.
>Any comments? I am thinking of returning it for something else - it's not
>doing what I need it to do (scan negs)
You will spend a lot more for a better scanner. I can say don't buy a
Tamrack. They may do 2400 dpi but that is the only way it is better
than the Primefilm. It looses shadow details and washes out highlights
dreadfully and once when looking at one in a shop when I was ready to
buy the display model ate the slide carrier and promptly got stuck for
an hour - with MY slides inside. I'd like a 4000 dpi Polaroid, but
can't afford it. I'm keeping my Primefilm until I can.
Leon
http://www.bluering.org.au
http://www.bluering.org.au/leon
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
