Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Your Epson Flat Bed Scanner Settings and Procedures  (Read 25440 times)
dmerger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 686


« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2011, 11:20:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Epsonís answer doesnít answer your basic question, which I believe is which adjustments are hardware versus purely software adjustments. In any event, Alan, I think youíre expecting way too much from Epson. Epson is a very large multi-national company with almost 80,000 employees. You may want to consider what type of person Epson likely employs to answer e-mails such as yours.  Iím not implying anything negative about the person, but what kind of background, experience and training do you expect such person has to be able to answer detailed questions on all Epsonís products, especially questions not addressed in any of the company literature?  Bearing that in mind, how much confidence would you have with any answer youíre likely to receive?   Wouldnít it be easier, and likely more or at least as accurate, to perform tests on your own scanner?

From the little Iíve read about your scanner, it doesnít appear to have a focus adjustment.  Your photos appear to be sharp, so maybe you donít have a focus problem.  As I understand it, with your Epson, the only way to be sure you canít get a better focus is to try altering the height of the film holder. 

Why are you scanning in 24 bit instead of 48 bit (more commonly referred to as 8 bit vs 16 bit)?  Even if PS Elements doesnít support 16 bit, would Elements at least allow you to open 16 bit scans and convert to 8 bit for processing?  If so, Iíd do so, but on a copy of the scan.  Iíd save the original 16 bit scan in case in the future you have the ability and desire to process your scans again.

How do you handle color management and/or profiles with your Epson? 

Your photos look good, so you obviously are doing something right.  Could you do better?  I donít know, maybe, maybe not, but youíre on the right track.
Logged

Dean Erger
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2011, 05:23:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Dean:  My scan procedure with the V600 uses 2400 and 24 bit with ICE with all other adjustments done afterwards using PS ELements 8.  I get 100meg TIFF file for 6x7 medium format out of the scanner.  I don't use 48 bit becuase my readings don't seem to indicate there's much of a difference with the V600 (The V500 is basically the same scanner).  Here's an interesting discussion that also mentions that you can get multi passes with Vuescan but not with the EPson scan program that I use.  Their discussion doesn't seem to notice any diferences between 24 and 48 bit.  http://ddisoftware.com/tech/profile-prism/problems-with-canon-mp980-and-epson-perfection-v500-scanners


The couple of 8 1/2x11" prints I did were acceptable.  I suppose if I ever want to do a real blowup, I could send out that particular negatve and pay for a drum scan.  But for my current purposes of 8 1/2x11 " prints and posting on the web, it seems to be doing OK.

The pictures when scanned though are very very soft and requires a lot of sharpening afterwards.  The V600 negative holder is not height adjustable to focus.

Michael from Epson gave me a little more info below.  I gave him a follow up question regarding scans passes during no ICE scans. We'll see what he says Monday.  Here's his latest responce to me.  I thought it interesting that he provided a Nikon link to explain ICE.

Here are his responses to date.

 Discussion Thread
 Response (Michael N) 01/07/2011 03:48 PM
Dear Alan,

Thank you for contacting Epson regarding your Epson Perfection V600 Photo. It is my pleasure to respond to your inquiry.

Digital ICE performs multi-sampling and each pass is offset a little bit and then "Software algorithms" perform the restoration by comparing the offset of each pass. They look at what each offset has in the area of the last offset. Powering of the lamp is not something scanners do. You cannot dim LED lights. All the scanners are using LEDs as light sources now. Digital ICE slows the scanning down on any device where it is a feature but typically lets you control the amount of sampling or passes. I've used this feature many times and I must say it's quite remarkable as to what it can do.

Details regarding Digital ICE and process.
http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2604/~/what-is-digital-ice%3F

Should you require further assistance with this issue, please reply without history (when possible), as our email system contains all previous correspondence. If you have a different technical support issue, please submit another email request via our website (http://www.epson.com/support), and we will respond in a timely manner.

Thank you again for contacting Epson.

Michael N
 Customer (Alan Klein) 01/07/2011 02:55 PM
Thanks Michael. You've been very helpful. I know that ICE effects the number of passes although I'm not sure about the speed when selecting ICE.
Does the speed and are the number of passes effected when there is no ICE selected? In other words, does the Epson program modify the results of color and lighting after the scan or do the non-ICE selection also effect the scan speed and number of passes so that the captured data is different?
Thanks again.
Alan
----- Original Message
-----
From: Epson Support
 
 Response (Michael N) 01/07/2011 07:59 AM
Dear Alan,

Thank you for contacting Epson regarding your Epson Perfection V600 Photo. It is my pleasure to respond to your inquiry.

Alan,
The operation of the scanner hardware itself is pretty basic. The Scanner's capture array lights up and
stays lit at the same intensity through the out the scan and as the array traverses across the glass. The settings can affect speed, number of passes that it's sampling. The light can not vary in intensity as that has to be consistent or you would certianly see it.

Should you require further assistance with this issue, please reply without history (when possible), as our email system contains all previous correspondence. If you have a different technical support issue, please submit another email request via our website (http://www.epson.com/support), and we will respond in a timely manner.

Thank you again for contacting Epson.

Michael N
 Customer (Alan Klein) 01/06/2011 06:55 PM
Ronald: Thanks for answering but your answer does not address my question. I don't think I explained my questioned carefully. What I want to know if if the scanner scans differently depending on the scanners settings? Or does all the changes take place in software after the scanner captures the image. In other words the scan process is the same regardless of the setting. The scanner light intensity stays the same for example or does it change in intensity or in speed?
Thanks
Alan





Logged
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2011, 06:56:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's Epson's last response.  It appears that the LED light does not get adjusted at any time (see earlier post) and during non-ICE operation there is only one scan.  If that's the case, I don't see how it makes a difference if you post process the scanned image and skip processing in the scanner.  The setting sapplied in the scanner are just changing the scanned image data.  There are no hardware changes to the scan process.  Alan.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Alan,

Thank you for contacting Epson regarding your Epson Perfection V600 Photo.

The scanner reverts to one-pass scanning when Digital ICE is turned off--greatly reducing scanning/processing time. All settings selected in the driver are applied as usual to the scanned image.


Jack D

Customer (Alan Klein) - 01/07/2011 07:55 PM
Dear Michael: If ICE is off, how does the scanning process change as you change the settings for Histogram, or color, or brightness?
Alan
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2011, 07:20:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's Epson's last response.  It appears that the LED light does not get adjusted at any time (see earlier post) and during non-ICE operation there is only one scan.  If that's the case, I don't see how it makes a difference if you post process the scanned image and skip processing in the scanner.  The setting sapplied in the scanner are just changing the scanned image data.  There are no hardware changes to the scan process.  Alan.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Alan,

Thank you for contacting Epson regarding your Epson Perfection V600 Photo.

The scanner reverts to one-pass scanning when Digital ICE is turned off--greatly reducing scanning/processing time. All settings selected in the driver are applied as usual to the scanned image.


Jack D

Customer (Alan Klein) - 01/07/2011 07:55 PM
Dear Michael: If ICE is off, how does the scanning process change as you change the settings for Histogram, or color, or brightness?
Alan

The fact that certain settings (non-ICE) affect speed tells you that there are hardware-based adjustments taking place, and I know for a fact that depending on the scanner model, there are. Some handle exposure changes by changing lamp brightness, others by scan time (consider it akin to a camera which alters light coming through the lens by adjusting the aperture or the shutter speed). It is simply incorrect to conclude from your discussions with Epson tech support that all adjustments are software-based, hence you cannot necessarily conclude that it makes no difference for any image whether you make some adjustments pre-scan or all adjustments post-scan. Alan, trust me on this - I've gone into this issue extensively with people who know a great many of these machines from the inside out and who earn their living by programming the scanning process from one model to the next.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #44 on: January 12, 2011, 09:13:34 PM »
ReplyReply

My comments as were Epsons were only for the Epson V600.  I have no idea what other scanners are doing.  Where di Epson say this scanner's speed changes?  Epson said nothing about speed changes but they did say there are no LED light changes and the unit only scans once, except in ICE mode and that's only to eliminate dust or correct tears in a picture.  If there are no physical changes in the scan, the processing has to be software after the scan.  The sensor capability is fixed just like in a camera.  You can change the ISO, but it must apply to the whole film. 

Certainly if another scanner changes the speed, it effectively is adjusting the exposure in much the same respect as a camera when you change the shutter or aperture.  That would apply to the whole image in the scanner like it does in a camera. You can't separate one part of the image from the other.  That would be great if you could because if scanners can do that then so could cameras.  Just think.  Built in HDR with one shot!  You can darken the too bright sky and brighten the too dark mountains. 

One question I have though.  If other scanners are changing speed, what does that accomplish?  If the original film is too dark, so you slow the scan (or raise the scanner sensors output like raising the ISO in a camera), but all that will do is make the dark areas nosier because the film does not contain the data to begin with.  No?

Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #45 on: January 12, 2011, 09:57:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Alan, please go back to reply #41 and read what you report Epson told you:

<The operation of the scanner hardware itself is pretty basic. The Scanner's capture array lights up and
stays lit at the same intensity through the out the scan and as the array traverses across the glass. The settings can affect speed, .............>

Once you see them say the settings can affect speed, that's hardware. Lower/higher speed increases /decreases the amount of light hitting the CCD per pass which increases/decreases the exposure. The ultimate light gathering capability of the CCD is fixed but the amount of light sent to it is variable in different scanners either by altering scan speed or lamp brightness or a combination thereof.

BTW, both the latest version of Vuescan Professional as well as SilverFast provide a multi-exposure function which is useful for bringing out deep shadow detail that may otherwise get lost. This also works with hardware in both applications for all applicable scanners, as it makes two scans. Epson Scan does not support this capability so the Epson tech can't be expected to know about it.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #46 on: January 12, 2011, 10:25:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I interpreted "speed" to mean the overall scan time because the second part of the sentence refered to multiple passes which only happens in ICE.  But you may be right that Epson does change the speed of the scan.  If as you say that other programs  do that, why can't Epson?  How would I test that in my scanner?  What setting would I change?  I wonder how effective that is?  Another forum said that they couldn't see a dfifference.  If the shadow area is dark, how is the scanner going to pull more data?  Isn't it just doing what PS does with shadow brightness sliders?  Have you experimented with this and what's the difference you see?  If you take a properly exposed negative, and raise the exposure by slowing the speed, wouldn't you blow the highlight portion? 


My other question is how does the multiple scan process work with te other programs? 
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #47 on: January 13, 2011, 07:33:15 AM »
ReplyReply

I interpreted "speed" to mean the overall scan time because the second part of the sentence refered to multiple passes which only happens in ICE.  But you may be right that Epson does change the speed of the scan.  If as you say that other programs  do that, why can't Epson?  How would I test that in my scanner?  What setting would I change?  I wonder how effective that is?  Another forum said that they couldn't see a dfifference.  If the shadow area is dark, how is the scanner going to pull more data?  Isn't it just doing what PS does with shadow brightness sliders?  Have you experimented with this and what's the difference you see?  If you take a properly exposed negative, and raise the exposure by slowing the speed, wouldn't you blow the highlight portion? 


My other question is how does the multiple scan process work with te other programs? 

I'm fairly certain my interpretation of what the Epson tech told you is correct. If you are asking me why Epson doesn't provide multi-exposure as an option in Epson Scan, I have no idea. You would need to ask them. Multi-exposure is an option provided in some scanning software to make the scanner do two passes over the image at different exposure levels. It's effectiveness is very image-dependent - there are no general rules here. When dealing with dark shadows, the key issue is "how dark" - if they are at the bottom of the luminosity scale, there's not much that can be done. If they have any workable tonal gradation, the second exposure pass of a multi-exposure algorithm would attempt to increase CCD saturation in those areas to pull-up whatever information may be there. It is definitely not just doing what PS does with shadow sliders. The latter remaps pixel brightness, the former actually tries to drag out embedded information by exposing it more. Different procedures, which can produce different outcomes, again depending on the image. By using a combination of exposure and highlight control at the scan stage you can protect the highlights - again the specifics depending on the image, and on how the scanning software developer has written the multi-exposure algorithm. The best way of answering these questions to your satisfaction is to do your own testing.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #48 on: January 13, 2011, 08:54:07 AM »
ReplyReply

According to Silverfast, multiexposure is achieved by performing a double scan with increased exposure time in the second scan. Not every scanner allow this. Anyway, the epson V600 is supported in this functionality from Silverfast version 6.6.1r4 or newer

For some reason, ICE is not supported by Silverfast for the Epson V600.

Here is a description of multiexposure: http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #49 on: January 13, 2011, 08:56:39 AM »
ReplyReply

According to Silverfast, multiexposure is achieved by performing a double scan with increased exposure time in the second scan. Not every scanner allow this. Anyway, the epson V600 is supported in this functionality from Silverfast version 6.6.1r4 or newer

For some reason, ICE is not supported by Silverfast for the Epson V600.

Here is a description of multiexposure: http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html

The reason why SilverFast does not include ICE is because it has instead its own, tecvhnically superior "iSRD".
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #50 on: January 13, 2011, 09:15:07 AM »
ReplyReply

The reason why SilverFast does not include ICE is because it has instead its own, tecvhnically superior "iSRD".

Ok, but you need the HDR version of silverfast to use iSRD on supported Epson scanners. ICE is supported for other Epson scanners (like V700, V750, 4990) in the SE and AI versions.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #51 on: January 13, 2011, 09:45:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Ok, but you need the HDR version of silverfast to use iSRD on supported Epson scanners. ICE is supported for other Epson scanners (like V700, V750, 4990) in the SE and AI versions.

Correct.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #52 on: January 13, 2011, 04:54:27 PM »
ReplyReply

That's interesting about the shadow areas.  I notice in my 35mm Ektachrome scans this problem is more prevalent than in the 120 Velvia, Ektar and Fuji film scans.  And more so in positive film than negative whioch probably explains why the new Portra negative films are good for scanning.  You can see the shadow differences in my FLickr gallery between 35mm and 120. 

Too bad about the ICE because I do use it and it helps in PP.   

What experience have you all had with the double scan?  The sample Silverfast showed is nice but it is their web page and I expect them to show their best.  I'd be more interested in the results you're getting.  For example, on shots that are exposed properly, much difference?  On shots that are over or under-exposed, much difference?  When do you most need and use it?
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #53 on: January 13, 2011, 06:21:18 PM »
ReplyReply

That's interesting about the shadow areas.  I notice in my 35mm Ektachrome scans this problem is more prevalent than in the 120 Velvia, Ektar and Fuji film scans.  And more so in positive film than negative whioch probably explains why the new Portra negative films are good for scanning.  You can see the shadow differences in my FLickr gallery between 35mm and 120. 

Too bad about the ICE because I do use it and it helps in PP.   

What experience have you all had with the double scan?  The sample Silverfast showed is nice but it is their web page and I expect them to show their best.  I'd be more interested in the results you're getting.  For example, on shots that are exposed properly, much difference?  On shots that are over or under-exposed, much difference?  When do you most need and use it?

For the longest time during the film era I used colour negative materials because I considered they were preferable for reproducing deep quarter-tones and natural colour. They were grainier, but that's the trade-off. As for multi-exposure - a mixed bag - as I mentioned before, its impact varies according to the image. On the whole I have found it subtle.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #54 on: January 13, 2011, 07:54:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Multiexposure would make a difference in the deep shadows of slide film. It is useful for underexposed / underdeveloped slides. I havenīt find advantages scanning negative film.

Here is an example of a underexposed (maybe underdeveloped) velvia 50 slide.

Epson V700, Silverfast AI Studio, scan at 2400 dpi.

The first image is the full frame with one border (where the camera prints data) scanned with multiexposure.

The next two frames show a detail of the scan (including part of the frame with camera data), first with single pass scan and the last with multiexposure. I adjusted the levels to emphasize the noise difference, both samples with the same adjustment.

I conclude there is a noticeable difference in terms of noise and DR

Edit: Just as a reference, the second exposure takes more than double the time than the first one
« Last Edit: January 13, 2011, 08:03:58 PM by FranciscoDisilvestro » Logged

Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #55 on: January 13, 2011, 09:38:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Those are interesting.  I don't really see more details in the image in the second one but the noise is definitely reduced. Are you Multi Sampling or Multi Exposinghttp://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html  Could you get rid of the noise PP?

The second scanned picture's black area appears blacker which is good but that could because the noise is reduced.  The scans might be cancelling the noise in the same way the ICE does in its double scans.  Silverfast says noise is reduced because of the multi scans even though it's not operating ICE protocol.  Also notice the negative border is very noisy as well; it's not only the picture area that's noisy.  Is that normal?

I really appreciate you posting these images.  My main concern however is for basically normally exposed pictures.  I'm not trying to do magic with badly exposed pictures.  I'm not going to use those bad shots anyway.  When would you use Multi-Exposing on normally exposed pictures and what kind of results can you expect?  Can these results be basically duplicated by using lightening shadows feature in PS?  I  wouldn't want to spend a lot of extra money on Silverfast and spend all that extra time scanning for only marginal improvement over PS.  Plus with my V600 I'd lose ICE.
Logged
Alan Klein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #56 on: January 13, 2011, 10:11:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's my latest question to Epson and their latest reply in this saga.  They're saying that slowing the speed will not increase the Dmax (3.4 in the V600).  Of course SIlverfast says their second slow Multi-exposure scan does increase Dmax.  Is that just hype on Silverfast's part to sell a product?  If slowing exposures do what Silverfast says, it would be in Epson's marketing benefit to include Multi-exposure in their own software.  But if these slow scans do not increase Dmax as Epson says, then Epson wouldn't provide it and don't.  So who really knows the truth?  The last picture above created with a slow Multi-exposure scan does not seem to have more details then the second single scan picture, nor is it more exposed.  It only has less noise.
---------

 Response (Jack D) 01/13/2011 02:46 PM
Thank You for Contacting Epson


Dear Alan,

Thank you for contacting Epson regarding your Epson Perfection V600 Photo.

The ability to accurately capture shadows and highlights when scanning film is determined by the scanner's dynamic range not speed. The reference to this specification comes under "Optical Density" (same thing as dynamic range). This scanner has a 3.4 Dmax. The maximum possible is 4.0 -- available on higher end scanners. If you need to zoom in on a scanned image to see more detail or you want to make large printouts then you must increase the resolution. This generates more scan lines per inch. Your scan time will increase; that's to be expected.


Thank you again for contacting Epson.


Jack D
 Customer (Alan Klein) 01/12/2011 08:55 PM
Jack: What do you mean?: " All settings selected in the driver are applied as usual to the scanned image." Does the scanner change speeds across the film by changing any of the settings or is this just changes made to the image after the scan? My question has to do with exposure in the scan. If the scan goes more slowly, then it could pick up and see the darker areas in the shadows better? Does this happen?
Thanks
Alan
Logged
degrub
Guest
« Reply #57 on: January 14, 2011, 01:48:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Isn't Silverfast's technique essentially the same as what some use in HDR ? Expose for the light end, expose for the shadows, combine the images in some fashion - and thus see more of the tones overall ?

i think the "slower pass" is just a longer exposure time at each sample line - not what Epson was responding.

ICE and multisampling are attacking two different issues - ICE for media defects and MS for stochastic noise - essentially random electronic noise generated in the sensor.

Multiexposure seems to be useful when the image in the  media has more dynamic range than the scanner can capture in one exposure.

Frank
Logged
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 323


WWW
« Reply #58 on: January 14, 2011, 05:06:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Those are interesting.  I don't really see more details in the image in the second one but the noise is definitely reduced. Are you Multi Sampling or Multi Exposing?  http://www.silverfast.com/highlights/multi-exposure/en.html  Could you get rid of the noise PP?

The second scanned picture's black area appears blacker which is good but that could because the noise is reduced.  The scans might be cancelling the noise in the same way the ICE does in its double scans.  Silverfast says noise is reduced because of the multi scans even though it's not operating ICE protocol.  Also notice the negative border is very noisy as well; it's not only the picture area that's noisy.  Is that normal?

I really appreciate you posting these images.  My main concern however is for basically normally exposed pictures.  I'm not trying to do magic with badly exposed pictures.  I'm not going to use those bad shots anyway.  When would you use Multi-Exposing on normally exposed pictures and what kind of results can you expect?  Can these results be basically duplicated by using lightening shadows feature in PS?  I  wouldn't want to spend a lot of extra money on Silverfast and spend all that extra time scanning for only marginal improvement over PS.  Plus with my V600 I'd lose ICE.

I used Multiexposure, which is a newer function that performs 2 scans (you canīt change it) at different exposures (scan time). Multisampling on the other hand, performs multiple scans (up to 16) at the same exposure and then averages them which also reduces noise.

The purpose of Multiexposure is not to increase detail, is to reduce noise. Even if theoretically you cannot increase DR, the effect of reducing noise is to increase the "useable or apparent" DR.

The borders of the image are noisy because they are black (slide) and I intentionally changed the levels to emphasize the differences between both scans (Middle tones to 1.51)

I applied some noise reduction in PP with Nik Define 2.0 to both scans (one pass & multiexposure). The first image shows the singe pass with NR, the second the Multiexposure with NR. Applying NR to the single pass scan result in an image with noise similar to the original scan with multiexposure, but apparently with less contrast. Applyinig NR to the multiexposure gives probably the best result.

You can download a free trial demo version of Silverfast and do your own test before actually spending any money
« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 05:09:17 AM by FranciscoDisilvestro » Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6767


WWW
« Reply #59 on: January 14, 2011, 08:13:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Alan, what Epson told you about DMax is correct. The point LSI makes about SilverFast needs to be understood in context. Let us say you have a scanner capable of achieving DMax 4.0, just for sake of illustration. Let us say without multi-exposure your media is such that in the scan everything from 3.7 to 4.0 is blocked-up. Then the effective DMax of that image scan is 3.7, in the sense that the blackest black below which you can't distinguish anything is positioned at 3.7. If by using Multi-exposure it unblocks the detail contained between 3.7 and 4.0, the effective DMax approaches the scanner's physical limit.

The primary purpose of Multi-exposure in SilverFast is not to deal with noise - it is to improve tonal separation in the quarter-tones. However, because it makes two passes, it scrambles random noise and thereby at the same time achieves much of the benefit from multi-sampling which takes longer and doesn't give you the exposure benefit. This stuff by the way is explained in the SilverFast manual which is available on their website.

I agree with Francisco's suggestion that you can download any of this software free and do your own experimenting over a trial period. That's really the best way to see what works most suitably for your own needs.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad