The thing is, there was a (reddish) color cast *before* applying gain.
And it seemed heavier on a second, even darker picture (thinner
negative!). I'm not sure where that comes from but it may be that the
scanner is not competely compensating for the color of the film base on
such "thin" underexposed negatives - it looks like just that color.
Casts are quite complicated because there are so many components
(characteristic film curve, scanner response, etc), but in a nutshell,
you can reduce a cast by adjusting individual Analog Gain (AG)
channels *if* the film response is linear (as I explained last time).
For example, try reducing the red channel AG and see what happens.
The noise on the scan of the second negative was horrible (and I wonder
if it could be actually worse when applying "gain" since it needs *less*
light rather than more for an underexpoised negative!).
Negatives add another complication because they have to be inverted.
If you use Auto Exposure then NikonScan has been known to clip a bit.
There are many ways of tackling this. At one end, you can just turn
AutoExposure off, and at the other end, scan negatives as Positive and
then do the inversion manually. In both cases you will also have to
expand the dynamic range by setting the black and white point because
negatives (unlike slides) are compressed on film.
If you want to turn AutoExposure (AE) off, do note that Nikon hates it
when you do that and is very cranky! What you need to do is, turn AE
off in NikonScan. Close NikonScan. Turn off the scanner!!!!!
Apparently this setting is saved in the scanner itself!?!?!? Only
then, is the Auto Exposure truly off. But if you turn it on even for a
brief moment, you have to repeat the whole procedure again.
On the other hand, if you scan negatives as positive, you will have
more control. However, you have to do the inversion yourself (which is
not a big problem) but you also have to remove the orange mask, which
is more complicated. The easiest way is to scan a bit of the unexposed
film edge. You then use that to set the white point and the orange
mask should be gone. There's more to it than that but edge is the key.
And once I learn PSP's noise reduction tool, I'm going to test some
noise reduction plugins as well. Practice, practice, practice.
The best way of removing noise is to scan twice and then combine. I've
written many long messages on the subject because that's what I've
been wrestling with all along. Check the archives (look for "twin
scan") and then let me know if you need more info.
I'm working on "getting organized" now.
It took me 2 years to do that! ;o) Including writing my own scanner
program, 16-bit histogram and a twin scan merge program!
I picked up the indispensable film holder this afternoon (nearly costing
me what it seems I'd haggled off the price of the scanner! Gulp!) - I
didn't ask what it'd cost when I ordered it because there is no way
around it: I *need* that thing.
I don't know how much it is but I do know it's pricey. It's just Nikon
trying to squeeze out every penny. :-/ I think it's despicable because
the film holder is a "must have". As I say they did include it with
the LS-30 but not with LS-50!?
And I found that I have negatives going
back to 1985 (not '87) - and will need to apply my new numbering system
to the films, put the strips all in film-strip-holder-sheets (what do
you call those things?) and already noted some strips with cut-through
sprocket holes and other problems.
I just call them "sleeves" or "negative sleeves".
As to a numbering system, there were some messages here about that.
It's important to figure it all out before you start. And especially
before you burn anything to DVDs!
I use a very simple system. Basically, I put each film into its own
directory the name of which is the date as YYYY.MM.DD e.g. 2006.01.
The day is optional because it's not always known, but by using
"computer date" i.e. year first, they all sort nicely.
I then have 3 prefixes: S for slides, N for negatives, and P for
photographs (i.e. just paper, no negative). Each file name in the
directory is then the image number from the film/slide or a simple
incrementing number for photos.
I also got me
a nice microfiber cloth (in a little folder that protects it from dust)
and a blow brush - not that I don't have such things but I like to have
and keep a set of "scanner tools" all together.
I went through a few of those as well and found out that not
everything calling itself "microfiber" really is microfiber. The best
microfiber cloth I found was in a camera store in Germany, but someone
here reported seeing the same make in Irelands as well.
The brand name is "Hama", the cloth is gray in appearance and comes
with its own, dust proof, plastic container! Very handy! The price was
about 5 Euro. I got two so when one is in the wash I use the other.
With those, the FH-3 and the film-strip-holder-sheets and the binder to
store them in: expensive day, today...
I know what you mean! But at least you're all set now. The next big
expense is going to be DVDs! I'll start burning mine, not because I'm
done, but because I filled up all my hard disks (1 x 160 GB + 2 * 250
GB). So I need to free up some disk space before I can scan some more.
One more for today: what would you do with a cut-through negative? 1/3
of the negative on one strip, 2/3 on the next?
When I was sorting out all my films I noticed I had one of those! Of
course, it was a very important film!!! How can those *idiots* slice a
film like that is beyond me! I do have the prints (already scanned),
but I certainly want to scan the negatives. It will just take a lot of
work to fix them.
I plan to put them in the holder and then scan together. It's going to
be tricky establishing the exposure because of the light shining
through the crack. But it's essential to scan both halves together so
I can repair the damage without worrying about the alignment. I'll
also probably use the scanned photograph as a template.
There's no way around it, it will just take a lot of work... :-(
Don.
The second I took of her, she's more relaxed and it turned out
