![]() Probably better off using default scanner setting in Vuescan without calibration. The black is black not haze green/black or magenta/black in dark contrast area. I find that Vuescan does better job with slide without any calibrating the scanner so it looks good. Positive may come different story though. Vuescan is not very good with negative I am afraid it is all flat and washed out. If Plustek did fine tune LED to be not too bright, it would have come off much better result but my belief is that LED has to be bright to shorten scan time while they have narrow aperture not wide aperture to keep sharpness even across the film even the corner of it. Yeah and I think Plustek CMOS/LED do not mix well so the brightness off raw scan is actually too bright and it is hard for Silverfast to compensate it. Just get your scan and do everything outside of SilverFast. So should I use very flat setting and then edit later in photoshop? So when using Silverfast film emulsion like Fuji Superia 100 same as on film strip it came up too bright or too contrast. I guess Plustek Opticfilm 120 is not good at dynamic range. I have notice when using film setting in Silverfast, some contrast is too harsh and I tried everything like reduce exposure or anything nothing much luck. Lightroom is very good at postprocessing. I normally work in Lightroom, not being very good at Photoshop Moreover, as mentioned above, you have way more control than in silverfast. In silverfast you are working with a preview of the image whereas in Lightroom or photoshop you can see the final result. This means that most of the time your scan will look a bit flat. All the rest of the post-processing should be done elsewhere (especially sharpening). Multiple exposure and IR cleaning for instances should be done there. I need to learn what needs learning and what I can safely ignore.īasically, any setting that will help pulling more information from the scan should be done in Silverfast. It seems that the majority of SilverFast can be ignored. Hmmm.I normally work in Lightroom, not being very good at Photoshop nor wanting to spend huge amounts of time there with every image. I'll reckon that the algorithms in photoshop are more sophisticated as well. Photoshop without a doubt! You'll have a lot more control of the final result. I do not have a good feel for what is better so would appreciate some guidance. Is it highly preferable to do this while in Silverfast or do some here think that it is better to just ignore that feature and complete that in Adobe software? The Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE scanner is connected via USB 2.0, it has a compact format and with 1.6 kg it is easy to carry in the included carrying case.Can anyone comment about which is better, doing various processing actions in Silverfast as opposed to Photoshop or Lightroom? For example, you can sharpen in Silverfast. This allows you to change colors with just one push of a button and the dynamic range can be increased with SilverFast Multi-Exposure. In combination with the SilverFast SE software optimum results are achieved and it will save you a lot of work. Negatives or slides are placed in the supplied (film) holders, and the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE is doing its job. The scan itself takes place almost automatically. In combination with SilverFast iSRD dust and scratch can automatically be removed from the footage. This scanner uses an infrared channel to detect dust and scratches. The Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE is a scanner for 35mm negatives or slides at a resolution of 7200 dpi and a color depth of 48-bit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |