Vintage Erotica Forums - View Single Post - Initial software settings

**Darth Joules** · January 7th, 2014, 02:43 PM

Thanks for showing us your scans for critique.

From the Epsom software batch #2 is the best of the three. It might seem flatter in color than #1 (Jim's pick), but as you said yourself #2 is the nearest to the original material so that's the best starting point to work from. #1 and #2 are the same quality, just different in color output. You can use the Curves tool in PS to quickly color correct an image which in #2's case is too much green cast.

From those done using the Vuescan software #5 is the best out of the four. Color and detail wise #4 is the same, but the sharpening in #4 is too aggressive and highlights a lot more moire effect. One could sharpen up #5 in PS more subtly and it would need less post processing work than #2.

Here's #2 quickly color corrected. Note: I could have spent a more time trying to find a better mid tone reference point and the result would have been better. As you can see it's now similar color wise to #5, but it is still has too much contrast, etc; and needs more work.

So I would pick #5 as the one I would go with straight off the scanner if it didn't suffer from the moire effect and that's one problem all your scans have. The appearance of moire effect, to differing degrees, in different areas of the image. Disable the Unsharp mask in the software whilst scanning as that is usually the main culprit. Never trust the software's sharpening filter, I never use it, do all your sharpening in PS where you have much more control over the end result. If that doesn't eliminate the moire effect try scanning at a lower dpi levels, like 240 dpi.

I'm assuming, Jumpman2, you export you scans as TIFs and then resave them as seperate JPGs through PS or Literoom?

Leave JPG compression at maximum quality! JPG is lossy format and destructive. The more the image is compressed the more data is lost from the image resulting in an increasing poorer quality image. If the file size is too big in your opinion, resize the image. In my opinion a 1-2MB image file is perfectly OK.

January 7th, 2014, 02:43 PM	#5
Darth Joules Veteran Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 3,531 Thanks: 11,945 Thanked 79,771 Times in 3,160 Posts	Thanks for showing us your scans for critique. From the Epsom software batch #2 is the best of the three. It might seem flatter in color than #1 (Jim's pick), but as you said yourself #2 is the nearest to the original material so that's the best starting point to work from. #1 and #2 are the same quality, just different in color output. You can use the Curves tool in PS to quickly color correct an image which in #2's case is too much green cast. From those done using the Vuescan software #5 is the best out of the four. Color and detail wise #4 is the same, but the sharpening in #4 is too aggressive and highlights a lot more moire effect. One could sharpen up #5 in PS more subtly and it would need less post processing work than #2. Here's #2 quickly color corrected. Note: I could have spent a more time trying to find a better mid tone reference point and the result would have been better. As you can see it's now similar color wise to #5, but it is still has too much contrast, etc; and needs more work. So I would pick #5 as the one I would go with straight off the scanner if it didn't suffer from the moire effect and that's one problem all your scans have. The appearance of moire effect, to differing degrees, in different areas of the image. Disable the Unsharp mask in the software whilst scanning as that is usually the main culprit. Never trust the software's sharpening filter, I never use it, do all your sharpening in PS where you have much more control over the end result. If that doesn't eliminate the moire effect try scanning at a lower dpi levels, like 240 dpi. I'm assuming, Jumpman2, you export you scans as TIFs and then resave them as seperate JPGs through PS or Literoom? Leave JPG compression at maximum quality! JPG is lossy format and destructive. The more the image is compressed the more data is lost from the image resulting in an increasing poorer quality image. If the file size is too big in your opinion, resize the image. In my opinion a 1-2MB image file is perfectly OK.