Raw & Post Processing, Printing > Digital Image Processing
Silverfast 8 + Nikon 5000 + Kodachrome = scan lines/banding
Mark D Segal:
--- Quote from: Christoph C. Feldhaim on March 19, 2012, 03:13:41 am ---You could try Super Fine Scan - it takes more time, but I heared, that banding problems which ocurred with the LS8000 were fixed by some people using SFS mode.
I never had banding problems with my LS9000 so far.
Concerning Silverfast - The new version is a mixed bag.
What is really good, is, that now the IR extraction for the Nikon scanners (finally!) works on windows, but they omitted the analog lamp control, which is bad.
There are also some bugs with the MF film holder for the LS9000 - I'm sure they'll fix it soonish.
--- End quote ---
Christoph - they didn't "omit" lamp control - but it isn't present yet. :-)
syncrasy:
--- Quote from: Mark D Segal on March 19, 2012, 09:01:46 am ---I hope you labelled the images correctly, because the Nikon Scan image looks the worst of the lot - the sky looks like coarse sandpaper, not the case for the two to the right.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I agree. Is that because Nikon Scan can only scan up to 16 bit (versus 48 bit for SilverFast)? Presumably Nikon would recommend fixing this using their grain smoothing tool during scan (e.g., GEM, or one of those acronyms that I can never remember).
--- Quote from: Mark D Segal on March 19, 2012, 09:01:46 am ---As for the two to the right, it made no difference with versus without multi-exposure - which can indeed happen when the deep quarter-tones are just too dense. I wonder about the colour balance of the SilverFast scans. Were you using a scanner profile?
--- End quote ---
Sorry, but are you referring to sky courseness/fineness (which is the same in the two SilverFast scans)? Or are you referring to my claim of jaggedy scan lines (which are apparent in the right image, but not in the center image)? I'm not so worried about the color balance as I can fix that in Photoshop. And I'm assuming that color balance is a separate issue from the scan line issue. Are you suggesting the two issues might be related?
Regarding profiles, the initial SF8 scan had no profile (I guess it got deselected after a recent software update), but then I re-selected the SF Kodachrome for 5000 profile and got the same results (scan lines).
Attached are two color management preferences: (1) after reselecting the Kodachrome profile and (2) after resetting the SilverFast 8 software (which deletes all preferences). Jagged scan lines persist.
Nigel Johnson:
--- Quote from: syncrasy on March 19, 2012, 09:35:41 am ---…Nikon Scan can only scan up to 16 bit (versus 48 bit for SilverFast)?
--- End quote ---
Mark
16 bit and 48 bit are the same! Nikon are quoting the per channel bit depth 16 red bits + 16 green bits + 16 blue bits = 48 total bits, whereas SilverFast are simply quoting the total bits. (The same occurs with 8 bits per channel versus 24 bits total). Note that some scanner files may include an extra channel for an infra-red channel that is used in some scanners for dust reduction giving either 32, 56 or 64 total bits per channel (note: 56 bits is a 16 bits per channel colour image with an 8 bit IR channel).
Regards
Nigel
Modified to correct typo.
syncrasy:
Thank you for the clarification, Nigel.
Mark D Segal:
--- Quote from: Nigel Johnson on March 19, 2012, 10:28:33 am ---Mark
16 bit and 48 bit are the same! Nikon are quoting the per channel bit depth 16 red bits + 16 green bits + 16 blue bits = 48 total bits, whereas SilverFast are simply quoting the total bits. (The same occurs with 8 bits per channel versus 24 bits total). Note that some scanner files may include an extra channel for an infra-red channel that is used in some scanners for dust reduction giving either 32, 56 or 6 total bits per channel (note: 56 bits is a 16 bits per channel colour image with an 8 bit IR channel).
Regards
Nigel
--- End quote ---
Nigel,
Yes it occurred to me too that it is just another numeraire for the same file format. In the case of SilverFast, if you select a 16 bit format preserving the infrared channel (such as HDRi it becomes a "64-bit scan" - 16 added for the IR channel.
Mark Segal
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version