Hi Chuck
First things first - thank you. That was super-fast of you. My responses in
between yours...
On 01/07/07, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I think I'd first ask why the scanning doesn't seem to be working out.
It's difficult to know since my father doesn't have a clue about things like
what optical resolution the scanner in use was. So I cannot tell. But if HE
says it's not too good, I'm not going to argue because I'd prefer to think
that my ability to see quality is better than his.
Even an inexpensive scanner should be able to do the job.
Apparently not.
If you scan
> the image at even 600 dpi you'll have at least twice the resolution of
> the print.
Chuck, the print size is 6x6cm, square 120 format from the Kodak Brownie.
Inexpensive scanners also have fairly low dynamic range but
> so does a B&W print. I suspect that the scanner is probably capturing
> what needs to be captured but, as with many digital images, the rest
> must be left to some creative post-processing.
I'm inclined to agree with you.
That said, I think it would be instructive to also use a DSLR and
> compare the "raw" images. Decide which is best before investing a lot
> of labor in post-processing. I would use normal copy procedures (lights
> at 45 degrees on either side and camera perfectly square to the image).
> I'd take a color image in raw form and do the B&W conversion later in
> PhotoShop.
What's your take on the DSLR's anti-aliasing filter softening the raw image?
It wouldn't have mattered whether the source capture is in colour or B+W. If
we get weird DSLRs that do not have anti-aliasing filters and are
specifically designed for B+W, maybe then shooting in black-and-white will
make a difference....
One possible problem might be pebbled or grained paper.
It's not lustre. It's not matte. It's gloss but paper-based as opposed to
PE-based paper. We're talking about the Sixties here, Chuck.
The pebbling or
> grain can really stand out in the copy but, as Ctein points out in his
> excellent book on restoration, the paper grain can be treated as large
> diameter digital noise and suppressed with the likes of Noise Ninja or
> other noise reduction software. If this or other restoration jobs are
> important to you I would highly recommend reading Ctein's book "Digital
> Restoration from Start to Finish". An excellent read for image
> processing technique even if you're not doing restoration. Highly
> recommended.
> <
> http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Restoration-Start-Finish-photographs/dp/0240808142/ref=sr_1_1/002-1642730-4676842?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1183296720&sr=8-1
> >
>
> ps: If you've never done copy work with a camera before Ctein points
> out that the old Kodak film era pub "Copying and Duplicating in Black
> and White and Color" is still an excellent resource. I bought mine on
> the web for about $2.
You lucky dawg...
I think my biggest stumbling block, Chuck, is that the print size is 6x6cm
as in 2 1/4in square. That's just about contact print size. At THIS size,
man, it's difficult enough even for my human eyes to see details.....
What I might do is to scan that image and post it on a link...Maybe you can
have a good gawk at it and then tell me....
Thanks heaps.
K.
Chuck Norcutt
>
> khen lim wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > My dad has a B+W contact print (6x6cm) but he doesn't have the negative.
> > He's looking at trying to reproduce it at the highest resolution. This
> photo
> > was captured using the Kodak Brownie. He claims to have tried scanning
> but
> > it's not too good. If we're going to do a direct reprography, using say
> the
> > E-510 (or other DSLR), how do you think we should approach this?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > K/
> >
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
--
"To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards of people" - Emily
Cox
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|