Noise/film grain reduction for Kodachrome scans. Any plugin recommendations

[saiguy]

I am to scan 5 or 6 thousand Kodachrome mounted slides. Using Mac, Nikon LS9000, SF8 Ai Studio. Will use PS/LR for workflow. I consider it an important project. I expect to need a plugin for noise/film grain. What are the latest software recommendations?

[aderickson]

I like the Neat Image plugin for film grain. It is also frequently updated.

Allan

[JayWPage]

I use Topaz DeNoise6 for Kodachrome scans.

[saiguy]

I scanned 1250 Kodachrome slides for a family friend recently. Hard to tell anything from that as the photography was really crap. I know that the infrared dust removal does not work well, if at all, on KD's, maybe on sky portions with SF8 masking. So I am not sure what my needs are, but I anticipate they will be there given I want to do a good job.

My workflow will be 16bit tif, ARGB, 300 ppi, with a scaling factor of 485%. I find this to be a good multi-purpose size. Native print at aprox. 4.5 X 6.5 inch, but can get good prints from that on letter size. Any serious printing would be rescanned. I mention this as it can be a factor.

Allen. The Neat Image looks great. They mention a lot about film grain. That they frequently update also says a lot.

Jay. Topaz also looks great. Seems to be more geared to camera RAWs but you say works on your KD scans.

Will see if others way in. Thanks for your responses.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I scanned 1250 Kodachrome slides for a family friend recently. Hard to tell anything from that as the photography was really crap. I know that the infrared dust removal does not work well, if at all, on KD's, maybe on sky portions with SF8 masking. So I am not sure what my needs are, but I anticipate they will be there given I want to do a good job.

My workflow will be 16bit tif, ARGB, 300 ppi, with a scaling factor of 485%. I find this to be a good multi-purpose size.

Hi,

For the highest quality scans, 'always' scan at the native resolution of the scanner. For the Nikon LS9000 that means @4000 PPI, no scaling unless you really need a smaller size scanned file. Some flatbed scanners do not need to scan at their native resolution, because they do not have the required optical resolution, but the LS9000 does (it's a line scanner, not a flatbed). Then downsample to the required file size in pixels. Proper (meaning good quality) downsampling will already reduce the observed 'noise'. Undersampling (= below 4000 PPI) will increase noise or graininess, it creates grain-aliasing, that looks like ugly noise. This also applies to the dye clusters in color film, not just silver grains.

Since Kodachrome can (usually does) contain (some) residual silver (which is opaque for IR light), dust and scratch removal based on IR light usually does not work on Kodachrome slides.

Allen. The Neat Image looks great. They mention a lot about film grain. That they frequently update also says a lot.

Jay. Topaz also looks great. Seems to be more geared to camera RAWs but you say works on your KD scans.

Both 'Neat Image' and 'Topaz Denoise' produce excellent results, with Neat Image offering the most control (but with a learning curve). I use both, depending on the amount of time I want to spend on a noisy image.

Cheers,
Bart

[Mark D Segal]

SilverFast 8 version of spot and scratch removal (iSRD) is excellent, and will work for Kodachromes. For reducing the visual effect of grain a number of applications are about as good, however I would give a slight edge to Neat Image for this purpose. Use Photokit Sharpener for capture and output sharpening. This is not a plug because whether a I sell a copy more or less I don't care, but just so you'll know - I cover most of this in considerable detail in my ebook available from the SilverFast website; however, a lot of it, a bit more dated, also appears in articles I've published on this website you can consult easily if your LuLa membership is active.

It is not necessary to scan at the maximum resolution of the scanner. You should select the resolution that will cover for the largest size print you intend to make at the native resolution of the printer (e.g. Epson 360) without needing to resample. I know about the issue of grain alaising but with SF8 it's usually pretty safe to ignore it.

[saiguy]

Thanks Mark.

I will follow your advise. LSI short video on iSRD seems to say IR doesn't work on the denser portions on KD slides. That is why they show how to select the sky with the pen tool.
I don't remember your excellent book speaking about PKS, well look there again.

Thanks Bart.

I agree with what you say as pertains to scanning for large print files. I think it is over kill to use 4000 ppi for my purpose.
Scaling, hmm. Without magnification/scaling, wouldn't you get an out put of a 1.4 X .9 inch at 4k ppi?

[saiguy]

Mark,

I think output sharpening in LR is dependent on what capture sharpening is applied in LR. Hope I'm wrong about that.
If I do PKS capture sharpening in PS, not via round trip from LR, then want to apply output sharpening in LR, will it still work properly?

Searched your Lula posts. Most recent article I found is the one on your web site re Topaz 4.1. So I'll just go with your above advise.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Thanks Bart.

I agree with what you say as pertains to scanning for large print files. I think it is over kill to use 4000 ppi for my purpose.
Scaling, hmm. Without magnification/scaling, wouldn't you get an out put of a 1.4 X .9 inch at 4k ppi?

Yes, but that's just a calculation (if you could print at that density). What counts is the number of pixels you create, and that's based on the PPI setting. By using native resolution for scanning, you avoid the creation of aliasing artifacts. You also get more 'accurate' color, because when you downsample you'll get a weighted average of multiple source pixels with different colors, for each destination pixel. That's part of the aliasing you can avoid.

Cheers,
Bart.

[Alan Klein]

I would try a couple of different ways with a small sample of shots to determine what works best for you. Compare the final results, time spent, ease of processing, etc. before doing the whole 5000 and then realize you could have gotten better, simpler, and faster results if done a different way.

One other comment.  You didn't mention what the 5000 pictures represent.  That's a lot of scanning and you may blow your brains out before you're done as the process is tedious and often frustrating with all the scanning and post processing required, dealing with dust, etc.  Do you really need all 5000?  Are there duplicates, so-so shots, etc. that you can skip or are represented by better shots?   

Good luck.   

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Good advices, each from a different angle, from Mark, Bart and Alan.

Alan did raise an important point: the effort needed for 5000 scans. The last time I attempted just a dozen or so (and that was like a dozen years ago, on Minolta Multi Pro), it was a hair-pulling experience. There are services that would do it for you relatively cheap (I think the company was called Scan Cafe, or similar).

[Peter McLennan]

I'll chime in with another warning of the work load associated with scanning 5000 slides.  I did about 200 120 monochrome negs with a high end Nikon scanner a few years ago and it took me a month.    I read a half dozen books while waiting.  That's mostly what you do: wait.

I'd strongly recommend investigating scanning with a camera and macro lens.  Similar results, WAY less pain.

[saiguy]

Allen and Slobodan,

Yes, a large project. Roughly estimate 1k hours. I've done my dad's 4500 Ektachrome slides, 1250 Kodachromes for a family friend, waiting to get about 2k slides of my late cousin to process. So not hair pulling for me as it has become just work flow. But looking to enhance that WF.

The project is all shot in India by a world renowned Swami of the Ramakrishna Order. He has written numerous book. So the photography will be related to that. Some landscape, some places like buildings, some artifacts, etc. Said he took 40 rolls of film to the Himalayas. I believe he has good film photography skills.

BTW I am doing this for free. They will pay for an external drive, a LR6 perpetual I was lucky to get from B&H, etc.

I just looked at 50 Kodachrome slides shot by a professional from a raft trip on the Colorado River thru Grand Canyon in 1993. He gifted these to us. Seem a little overall dark, noise present in shadows. Maybe the dark is my poor development of 2 years ago. I do not see film grain issues, but I may not know how to recognize that.

It is for the Swami to toss out poor shots if he wishes. I'll get what I can from each image.

Those scan services do a poor job.

Bart, your last post is very interesting. Can I do the downsampling out of SF HDR Studio? Not concerned about file sizes as it will all be done on an external drive. When all the processing is done I will export everything from a LR Working lrcat. Those files will become my Masters, imported into a different lrcat. Final finessing will be done there in LR with the New Masters. Would like to hear from Mark re your suggested WF of native 4k scans then down sampled. Take no offense at this, could be a better way, or best way to skin the cat.

I appreciate all the feed back here. This forum is a great resource.

[saiguy]

Mark,

Just read your info on PKS in the eBook. Seems the output sharpening can be applied there. Thus no need concerning my earlier question about applying it in LR. My output size would not change per this work flow.

[JayWPage]

I just looked at 50 Kodachrome slides shot by a professional from a raft trip on the Colorado River thru Grand Canyon in 1993. He gifted these to us. Seem a little overall dark, noise present in shadows. Maybe the dark is my poor development of 2 years ago. I do not see film grain issues, but I may not know how to recognize that.

The noise in the scans is from the scanner sensor, not the slide. Think of the scanner as a "digital camera", and in most cases it's a fairly old technology (10 - 20 years old) so there will be lots of noise in dark areas. Modify the exposure (in your scanner software) so that you "expose to the right" as you would with your camera to increase the signal to noise ratio and that may reduce the noise in the scans.

I've not found film grain to be a big problem in Kodachrome 64 slide scans, it's easily dealt with using fairly light settings in your software (in my case DeNoise). A bigger problem is dye separation forming blotches of colour in older slides, i.e. 1970's slides. I have had to fix it in PS.

[saiguy]

Peter, thanks for your input. I am not a photographer and do not have such equipment to do camera scans. Will have to tread the long road. But I think it will be more satisfying in the end than taking the bus.

Jay, Your input is quite welcome, especially about film grain. I experimented with ETTR a couple months ago. I determined it did not work. Scanner raw and camera raw seem to be altogether different animals. In scanner SF8, I set a white point around RGB 242, or so, given that I can increase exposure in LR with its ability to protect blow out.

Dye separation, hmm, ouch. Not sure I have seen that. Maybe can't recognize it. Wouldn't know how to deal with it in PS if I did. My experience is that Kodachrome is more difficult to work with than Ektachrome. Oh well.

[Mark D Segal]

Thanks Mark.

I will follow your advise. LSI short video on iSRD seems to say IR doesn't work on the denser portions on KD slides. That is why they show how to select the sky with the pen tool.
I don't remember your excellent book speaking about PKS, well look there again.

Thanks Bart.

I agree with what you say as pertains to scanning for large print files. I think it is over kill to use 4000 ppi for my purpose.
Scaling, hmm. Without magnification/scaling, wouldn't you get an out put of a 1.4 X .9 inch at 4k ppi?

iSRD works on most versions of Kodachrome. If it doesn't work well on your particular slides there is a "sister" tool in the application that will do it in another manner - very effectively - also useful for B&W negs by the way, which I- based cleaning can't handle.

[Mark D Segal]

Those scan services do a poor job.

Actually, they don't. I've tested Scancafe and fund it pretty good. Depends on what you need though. Alan's advice about the workload is correct, but since you appear to know that already and have resigned yourself to it, no harm. And yes, a good way to get some reading done that you may otherwise never get around to!

[Mark D Segal]

Oh - and BTW, Kodachrome was the least grainy of any colour film material I've ever used. Hardly a problem. An application such as Neat Image would handle it very well. Just don't apply it too strongly so that you conserve as much image detail as feasible. Do some testing for the best settings.

[smthopr]

I am to scan 5 or 6 thousand Kodachrome mounted slides. Using Mac, Nikon LS9000, SF8 Ai Studio. Will use PS/LR for workflow. I consider it an important project. I expect to need a plugin for noise/film grain. What are the latest software recommendations?

You are going to scan 6000 slides on a Nikon ls 9000?  How many years do you have to finish the project?  Keep in mind that dust removal on the Nikon will not work with Kodachrome either.  I have a Nikon 8000 and I know how slow the process is.