my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Scanning film is out of focus. (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Scanning film is out of focus. Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-20-2011 11:49 PM                     Now I'm a film-guy too. However, in addition to my film based cameras (Nikon and Canon), I now also have a Nikon digital. I shoot with both film and digital. There are times where digital has its advantages, the same with film. And with what you were doing, having a decent digital camera would be a good investment. Of course, my slide-projector to film camera technique would have worked too...the problem being, you would have had to wait for processing to see if you really got the picture...with digital, the answer would have been instant. Also, once you got your technique down (color correction and other filtering)...you could then repeat that on all of the rest of the slides. In fact, one of things I'm considering doing for "scanning" of large paper (bigger than legal) is to just shoot a picture of it and then convert that to a suitable (paper) sized version rather than shell out for a large-format scanner (it is amazing how expensive even going to 11x17 flat-beds cost, and sometimes it is "D" or "E" sized paper I want turned into electronic form. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-21-2011 12:21 AM                     My scanner (when it works) will scan negatives as wide as 120 but I have been able to scan 4x5 negatives with it. I scan in two passes, making sure there is at least 1/3 overlap then import to Photoshop via "Photomerge" and treat the two half-images as if they are tiles of a panoramic shot. But for having to make two passes with the scanner, the computer does most of the work. I like digital cameras too but I have so much film stuff that I just don't have a place for a digital camera, let alone the budget for it. If I need to, I can take film out of the camera and have it developed and contact printed in a couple of hours. I don't worry about missing the shot. If I really need to get it, I'll bracket and shoot twosies of everything. If it's a one-chance event, the probability that you'll get the shot is the same whether you shoot digital or film, anyway. Even though I learned on 35mm SLRs with TTL metering, most of the cameras I have don't have internal meters. They are either TLRs (like a Roleiflex) or rangefinders. Even the ones that have meters aren't coupled. It's really funny how you never think you'll ever learn to take pictures with one of those "old cameras" but, after one or two rolls of film you start to just develop the knack for it. If you can incident light meter the scene you can work up an exposure setting that will work and then interpolate around that area. If you can take spot readings, meter the light and dark areas and use those two extremes as a range to set exposures with. Once you get the hang of it you can just look at a scene and know what exposure to use. The meter I use most often is a Gossen Luna Pro. I can just take one or two readings of the general scene lighting and once I get into the groove I don't need to take any more readings until I shoot a new scene. The weird part is that, when you go back to a camera with TTL metering, you start looking at the readings and saying, "Naah!," then putting the camera on fully manual operation. For copying slides off a screen, I'd take two sets of photos to calibrate whie balance. One pure white against the screen and another with a gray card illuminated by the slide projector light. No, I don't own a "Whi-Bal" card.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-21-2011 10:39 AM                     As odd as it may sound...I'm pretty sure I do have a grey card specifically for checking white balance. I can't remember when I last used it or even where it is. You are right, of course, one should not only measure the full white but also grey...However, it would probably be best to have the grey be projected (i.e. have a slide of measured gray scale) and check the range. -Steve  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-21-2011 10:52 AM                     At the photo studio I worked at during the holiday, they would take two photos to balance the cameras each day. One was the white seamless backdrop. The other was a "WhiBal" card. A white, black and neutral gray card all in one. (Supposedly, every WhiBal card is measured with a spectrometer when it leaves the factory.) I just have a regular, old 18% gray card but, most of the time, I shoot black and white so a critical reference isn't necessary. Just so long as middle gray hits zone V on film.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-22-2011 08:37 AM                        I am coming in late here, but one option would be a slide duplicator (Bowens Illumitran or Durst Chromapro or similar) with a digital camera. You could rephotograph the slides and probably get similar results to what the scanner would provide at a higher speed. The digital camera could probably be borrowed or rented if you don't have one.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 02-22-2011 09:14 AM                     I use an 18% gray card to set custom white balance with my 5D Mark II. The camera's light meter in the view finder works well enough, but sometimes I'll cheat and use the histogram in live view to dial in the exposure just right. Auto white balance isn't very good at all with most cameras, especially if you're taking numerous shots that will be used together in the same spread -lots of fun with slight color differences from shot to shot. If you shoot in RAW you can manually change the color temperature to the same setting in all of the shots, but it's easier to just set a custom white balance and be done with it. Custom white balance is a must if you're going to shoot some time lapse stuff for video.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-22-2011 12:13 PM                     I try to do everything in RAW format. When I use a digicam, I set it to RAW if it is available. When I scan anything except for documents I intend to convert to PDF, I set my scanning application to store as RAW. If I can shoot, scan or convert to DNG I will do that if possible. (DNG = "digital negative" which is a subset of the RAW format which is supposed to be more cross-platform compatible for archival use.) I find that shooting/scanning in RAW allows you to get your color balance, exposure and detail set pretty close to what it needs to be before you even start editing. Once it is loaded into Photoshop, you usually only need a few minor tweaks like shadow/highlight correction and a quick curves adjustment to get it where you want it. Luckily, I was able to borrow a scanner to finish the project with. I'm done and I just delivered this afternoon. Now, I'm probably going to disassemble my busted scanner and see if I can figure out what's wrong with it. I'm hoping that it's just something that's misaligned which I can just put back and be done. Otherwise, I'll have to get a new scanner. That will eat up all the money I just made doing this project. A good digicam would be nice to have but the budget won't support that purchase for the foreseeable future.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-22-2011 01:52 PM                        This thread makes me realize (again) how much I don't know about photography and light. I wonder how much better my "images" would be if I actually knew something!  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-22-2011 02:34 PM                     What's the problem? You, pretty much, take a projector and turn everything around backwards and you have a camera! Projectors and cameras are virtually the inverse of each other. Think about it for a second.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 02-22-2011 06:54 PM                     And to an electrician...indistinguishable.  |  IP: Logged Randy Stankey Film God Posts: 6539 From: Erie, Pennsylvania Registered: Jun 99 posted 02-22-2011 07:15 PM                     Consider that electricians work with alternating current. And, since, at any instant, alternating current could be flowing in either direction, for all intents and purposes, you could say that it is flowing in both directions, simultaneously. (Think about Shroedinger's Cat.) Therefore, electricity is flowing both forward and reverse at the same time. Because electricians think in terms of forward/reverse at all times, they would naturally think that a projector and it's inverse, the camera, exist simultaneously in the same space. That's why electricians call projectors "cameras." See? It all makes perfect sense when you think the right way!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.