Elitechrome 100 Slide Scanning with Coolscan V ED

Hi,

I am a owner of a Nikon Coolscan V ED. The scan quality is a big step
forward compared to my former 2500 dpi HP photosmart S20, but I have a few
questions. I take my slides with a contax/zeiss 35mmSLR equipment using
elitechrome 100 film.

1) It seems to me that there is no improvement in detail resolution when I
compare 2500 dpi HPS20 scans with 4000 dpi nikon scams. Is it possible that
2500 dpi is already sufficient for the ISO100 elitechrome?

2) The 4000 dpi (with ICE and GEM function on) in fact creates a grainy,
streaky structure in contrary to my old 2500dpi HPs20 scans, for example in
blue sky areas of my slides. Is that the already the elitechrome film grain
scanned by the nikon? I scanned the slides in glasless frames. I heard the
elitechrome is not suited for scanning purposes, but other films are. Is
that right, what are they? I also found in scanned B/W negative ISO 50 films
grainy, but not streaky structures, but I guess that must be noise or any
other disturbance and not the B/W film grain?

3) I found out that 48 bit of color depth improves quality compared to 24
bit, but handling the resulting 114 MB tiff scans is not very practical
(zipping does not reduce size). Neither Nikon Scan nor photoshop (ver. 5
limited edition) can save these files as jpeg. Is jpg only a 24 bit file
color depth file standard? What to do?


Oliver

"Oliver Kunze" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Is it possible that 2500 dpi is already sufficient for
the ISO100 elitechrome?

No, at 4000ppi it should be much better.

2) The 4000 dpi (with ICE and GEM function on) in fact creates a grainy,
streaky structure in contrary to my old 2500dpi HPs20 scans, for example
in
blue sky areas of my slides.

Are you looking at 100% zoom?

SNIP
Neither Nikon Scan nor photoshop (ver. 5 limited edition)
can save these files as jpeg.

Convert to 24-bit first, or use "Save for web" in Photoshop.

Is jpg only a 24 bit file color depth file standard?

Yes. Use Photoshop to convert to 8-bit/channel, but only after
colorbalancing/tonescaling and sharpening.

Bart

Oliver Kunze wrote:

Hi,

I am a owner of a Nikon Coolscan V ED. The scan quality is a big step
forward compared to my former 2500 dpi HP photosmart S20, but I have a few
questions. I take my slides with a contax/zeiss 35mmSLR equipment using
elitechrome 100 film.

1) It seems to me that there is no improvement in detail resolution when I
compare 2500 dpi HPS20 scans with 4000 dpi nikon scams. Is it possible that
2500 dpi is already sufficient for the ISO100 elitechrome?

At what resolution are you scanning with the Nikon? The
resolution can be adjusted... I use LS4000, by the way.


2) The 4000 dpi (with ICE and GEM function on) in fact creates a grainy,
streaky structure in contrary to my old 2500dpi HPs20 scans, for example in
blue sky areas of my slides. Is that the already the elitechrome film grain
scanned by the nikon? I scanned the slides in glasless frames. I heard the

I have problems with Kodak material scanned on the LS4000,
but since I almost never use Kodak, I am not very impacted.
Especially E200 was really, really fatal.

Do not forget to *switch off* ROC!! Its really important. ROC
helps only if you have really old slides with substantial
color fading.

Which level of GEM are you using?
My experiences with GEM are very positive, as a matter of fact
I never saw any comparable tool to GEM. My experiences with the
settings a

GEM 1 for Provia 100, Velvia 50
GEM 2 for Sensia 100,200 Agfa Precisa CT100 and 200
GEM 2 or 3 for Provia 400, Sensia 400
GEM 3 was enough for negatives such as Agfa Vista 800 or Fuji Press 1600

elitechrome is not suited for scanning purposes, but other films are. Is
that right, what are they? I also found in scanned B/W negative ISO 50 films
grainy, but not streaky structures, but I guess that must be noise or any
other disturbance and not the B/W film grain?

B/W material based on silver halide cannot be scanned using
IR ICE dust/scratch remover. Have you switched off ICE?


3) I found out that 48 bit of color depth improves quality compared to 24
bit, but handling the resulting 114 MB tiff scans is not very practical
(zipping does not reduce size). Neither Nikon Scan nor photoshop (ver. 5
limited edition) can save these files as jpeg. Is jpg only a 24 bit file
color depth file standard? What to do?

Oliver

Why not practical? Its digital photography! We have untold gigs of
space and DVD's to archive the data! Keep 48bit scans! I do without
exception. I use Vuescan to process raw 48bit files, but for a really
fine job you probably need something like Picture Window or than
of course Photoshop! Anyway, 48bit is essential if you use slide
material with high dynamic range. Wolfgang Faust who makes IT 8
calibration targets wrote that Fujichrome has dynamic range of 4!

Thomas

ThomasH wrote:


I have problems with Kodak material scanned on the LS4000,
but since I almost never use Kodak, I am not very impacted.
Especially E200 was really, really fatal.

Do not forget to *switch off* ROC!! Its really important. ROC
helps only if you have really old slides with substantial
color fading.

Which level of GEM are you using?
My experiences with GEM are very positive, as a matter of fact
I never saw any comparable tool to GEM. My experiences with the
settings a

GEM 1 for Provia 100, Velvia 50
GEM 2 for Sensia 100,200 Agfa Precisa CT100 and 200
GEM 2 or 3 for Provia 400, Sensia 400
GEM 3 was enough for negatives such as Agfa Vista 800 or Fuji Press 1600

Any for E100GX and E100S? I have trouble scanning them, grain
aliasing perhaps?

Cheers,
Alan


--
--e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 20:27:58 +0200, "Oliver Kunze"
wrote:

2) The 4000 dpi (with ICE and GEM function on) in fact creates a grainy,
streaky structure in contrary to my old 2500dpi HPs20 scans, for example in
blue sky areas of my slides. Is that the already the elitechrome film grain
scanned by the nikon?

Yes, it is film grain, and (ironically) it manifests how much better
Nikon is. All other scanners use a different light source which
"fuzzifies" the image so you don't see the grain. Nikon just shows you
what's on the film.

This is similar to someone needing glasses looking at a wall and
admiring its smooth surface. Then they put on glasses and discover all
the bumps, smudges and other imperfections...

One advice I read - but don't use myself - is to slightly de-focus
(click on manual focus and enter a value by hand). That should smooth
out the image somewhat and reduce the graininess.

Don.

"ThomasH" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
Which level of GEM are you using?
My experiences with GEM are very positive, as a matter of fact
I never saw any comparable tool to GEM. My experiences with the
settings a

GEM 1 for Provia 100, Velvia 50
GEM 2 for Sensia 100,200 Agfa Precisa CT100 and 200
GEM 2 or 3 for Provia 400, Sensia 400
GEM 3 was enough for negatives such as Agfa Vista 800 or Fuji Press 1600

I used GEM level 3, ROC off. I further found out that ICE is responsible for
the "streaks" between the grain in my scans. Turning ICE off takes them
away, but for the price of dust marks in the scan, which is not a good
option.

3) I found out that 48 bit of color depth improves quality compared to
24
bit, but handling the resulting 114 MB tiff scans is not very practical
(zipping does not reduce size). Neither Nikon Scan nor photoshop (ver. 5
limited edition) can save these files as jpeg. Is jpg only a 24 bit file
color depth file standard? What to do?

Oliver

Why not practical? Its digital photography! We have untold gigs of
space and DVD's to archive the data! Keep 48bit scans! I do without
exception. I use Vuescan to process raw 48bit files, but for a really
fine job you probably need something like Picture Window or than
of course Photoshop! Anyway, 48bit is essential if you use slide
material with high dynamic range. Wolfgang Faust who makes IT 8
calibration targets wrote that Fujichrome has dynamic range of 4!

Since what version number is Photoshop fully capable (filters etc.) of
handling 48bit? I understand elements 2.0 which came with my Coolscan is
not. Is PS 6, which is available at a fair price?
Thomas

Oliver

In article ,
says...

Since what version number is Photoshop fully capable (filters etc.) of
handling 48bit? I understand elements 2.0 which came with my Coolscan is
not. Is PS 6, which is available at a fair price?
Thomas

Oliver

Many 16 bit editing functions have been added to Photoshop PS.
Elements won't even open a file at 16 bit.

Mac

In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Oliver Kunze wrote:
Since what version number is Photoshop fully capable (filters etc.) of
handling 48bit? I understand elements 2.0 which came with my Coolscan is
not. Is PS 6, which is available at a fair price?

You probably want Photoshop CS. However, if youare not totaly set on photoshop
you could simply go here

rsb.info.nih.gov/ij
ij-plugins.sourceforge.net/plugins/imageio

and download imagej and image i/o plugin that will handle 16 bit (and 32bit & fp)
depth in tiff. You can then do lossy export as jpg from it.



Oliver



--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

The URL you posted has apparently been 'mugged' by some form of redirection command on
your server. This one might work better for "the rest of the world."

http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeimage/





"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
...
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Oliver Kunze wrote:
Since what version number is Photoshop fully capable (filters etc.) of
handling 48bit? I understand elements 2.0 which came with my Coolscan is
not. Is PS 6, which is available at a fair price?

You probably want Photoshop CS. However, if youare not totaly set on photoshop
you could simply go here

rsb.info.nih.gov/ij
ij-plugins.sourceforge.net/plugins/imageio

and download imagej and image i/o plugin that will handle 16 bit (and 32bit & fp)
depth in tiff. You can then do lossy export as jpg from it.



Oliver



--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"RSD99" wrote in message
...
The URL you posted has apparently been 'mugged' by some form of
redirection command on
your server.
SNIP

Both links work fine on my computer.

rsb.info.nih.gov/ij
ij-plugins.sourceforge.net/plugins/imageio

Bart