Hi, For those of you who might remember I asked the question about grainy images after scanning film with my Nikon scanner.
This is a question for Ann.
I have finally started scanning.
I have read through all your notes on setting up the scanner. However, one thing I did not find in the notes was this: Do you automatically use Digital Gem (to smooth film grain) when you scan??
When I zoom in above about 50%, the grain starts showing. (And this is only on 100 Asa color film). So I am wondering if I should just automatically use it, in case, in the future, any of the images will be used to make poster sized prints or just bigger than about 16×20, or so.
Is this something that i should be careful with, so as not to soften the image too much?
Digital GEM can work wonders, but it is very slow. To evaluate whether it’s necessary, scan a few images with it turned on, and then, scan the same images with GEM turned off. Send both sets of images through your production pipeline.
Keep track of the scanning time for both sets of images.
At the proofing stage, evaluate the difference between the quality of the two test sets, and if the increased scanning time is worth the difference (if any) you have your answer.
Whenever you embark on a project with a lot of manual work (eg scannning) every hour spent testing will generally save twenty hours of fixing. Seriously.
To deal with slow scanning times, you may find it more efficient to Batch-scan using NikonScan in stand-alone mode (rather than via the Photoshop plug-in).
Then you can work on your previously scanned images in Photoshop while the scanner does its thing in the background.
Regarding GEM settings: use the lowest number that provides acceptable results when printed or when viewed at 100%. At any other zoom-percentage, you are looking at an interpolated rendering of your imagenot at the actual image itself.
The amount of "grain" that is apparent in your processed film depends not only on the emulsion chosen but also on the way in which it was developed.
And 35mm is a VERY small format for big blow-ups at the best of times: you won’t get 5 x 4 quality (which is what I would choose to use for 20 x 16 output) from 35mm.
I always tend to think we will be blowing up the image, as we have while I lived in India… to about 20×24 size…printed directly from the neg under an enlarger, like they do in America. Only here, it will be from a CD.
I AM using OS 10.3.4 right now on my friend’s dual G4, so i am scanning in 16 bit and can do many things while working scanning.
Again, as for GEM, I have checked a few scans of 8-bit one pass of 400ASA film of faces, and the grain does start to show at 50%…not badly but it is there. In my landscape or photos with sunsets, it shows more…
So thank you, I can evaluate the same type of images in the same ASA by the tests I do on one or 2 of them.
90% of this film was developed in India under less than perfect conditions. And also, all of the film is scratched from the Indian processors…so I am using ice on all of them so far.
It all makes it very slow.
I have one more question. In scanning B&W, do you recommend scanning in:
color in 16 bit then changing to greyscale? Or greyscale in 16 bit? Or just greyscale at 8-bit, which is all the B&W is anyway.
I always scan in 16-bit and would never use 8-bit unless it was just for a low-rez for-the-web sort of thing.
Grayscale should be fine for B/W negatives. If you want to create B/W images from color negs., use RGB.
If the grain from your fast film is worrying you, I would suggest that you buy Grain Surgery (which we discussed earlier), and that you are very careful where & how you use USM.