Register on the forum now to remove ALL ads + popups + get access to tons of hidden content for members only!
vintage erotica forum vintage erotica forum vintage erotica forum
vintage erotica forum
Home
Go Back   Vintage Erotica Forums > Information & Help Forum > Help Section > Scanning Feedback
Best Porn Sites Live Sex Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 15th, 2009, 05:39 AM   #51
DARPA
Veteran Member
 
DARPA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Trapped inside a scanner
Posts: 3,431
Thanks: 4,207
Thanked 60,854 Times in 3,342 Posts
DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+
Default

Another thing I've learned, which may not be applicable to everyone, is that when scanning a page that has only one image on it, or when scanning a page with multiple images but you're only interested in one image, is to make sure the area you're scanning includes at least part of another image.

With my old scanner 10 years ago I found that if I used the marquee selection to restrict the scan to just the one image, the scan would sometimes come out worse than if I enlarged the marquee to include another image. Don't know why this was happening but it was definitely a factor in my scanning back then. I haven't seen it happen with the new scanner though so maybe the technololgy has improved on the low end of the scanner spectrum.
DARPA is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DARPA For This Useful Post:
Old December 16th, 2009, 06:30 AM   #52
DARPA
Veteran Member
 
DARPA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Trapped inside a scanner
Posts: 3,431
Thanks: 4,207
Thanked 60,854 Times in 3,342 Posts
DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+DARPA 250000+
Default

I forgot about this until tonight when I ran into this very issue but there's one other point on the subject of "black boxes" that should be made. Not all "black boxes" are there because someone blotted out text. Sometimes it's because one pic overlapped another in one spot and when the end product of your scanning output is supposed to be single images, as is the case for me and a lot of other scanners who don't want to go the "scan the whole page and everything on it as one lone image" route, you don't want a piece of another image there because that looks stupid. You really have no choice but to blot it out.
DARPA is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DARPA For This Useful Post:
Old July 13th, 2010, 09:16 AM   #53
Dekoda
Vintage Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 823
Thanks: 20
Thanked 24,247 Times in 822 Posts
Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DARPA View Post
I forgot about this until tonight when I ran into this very issue but there's one other point on the subject of "black boxes" that should be made. Not all "black boxes" are there because someone blotted out text. Sometimes it's because one pic overlapped another in one spot and when the end product of your scanning output is supposed to be single images, as is the case for me and a lot of other scanners who don't want to go the "scan the whole page and everything on it as one lone image" route, you don't want a piece of another image there because that looks stupid. You really have no choice but to blot it out.

Wow, I just came across this thread......I'm late to the discussion, but there are a few things I think I can add.

Yes, you do have a choice besides just blotting it out, you can do a rebuild. That's where you rebuild the part of the picture where a second picture overlapped. I did that all the time in my scans. I will admit that sometimes, trying to rebuild the picture is too difficult. When that happens, then you can black box the picture, although what I'd do was to make a box around the section that I wanted to blot out, select a color that matched the scene, fill it with that color, then place the model's name in the colored box. If it was done right, it looked like part of the original picture.
Dekoda is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dekoda For This Useful Post:
Old July 13th, 2010, 09:36 PM   #54
hartwig
Veteran Member
 
hartwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 382
Thanks: 1,522
Thanked 34,066 Times in 367 Posts
hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+
Default Color Correction

I know many words are said already about this topic but I thought about a new approach.
I thought if in mags some pages can be fixed very well using the standard auto-correction tools in e.g. PS it should be possible to find out what the program does and manually apply the same effects and thus getting the same results. But afterwards it sould be possible to reuse the filters I manually created for the pictures that do not work very well with auto color balance and stuff. And I might be able to re-use these filters for other mags aswell.

So here are my settings and the results:
(left pictures are totally untouched, the right ones have my filters applied)



On *MY* monitor (a mid-end HP TFT) the pictures pretty much look like in the magazine, regarding contrast, colors and hue.
I guess I overdid a little with yellow so you might wanna fix this....

As you can see in the settings screen I created adjustment layers, then added the picture itself below those. The purpose of the empty layer is that I can save the empty picture only consisting of adjustments as a psd-file.

Tell me what you think
hartwig

P.S:
- In my opinion brightness and contrast are not that important, but fixing Exposure, Gamma and most of all Offset will do most of the job!
- I disasseble the mags to avoid blurring at the edges and always try to fix double-pages... and like the results.
- Pages are from CC 176 which I hope I can finish soon
hartwig is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to hartwig For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 06:34 AM   #55
Dekoda
Vintage Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 823
Thanks: 20
Thanked 24,247 Times in 822 Posts
Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by hartwig View Post
I know many words are said already about this topic but I thought about a new approach.
I thought if in mags some pages can be fixed very well using the standard auto-correction tools in e.g. PS it should be possible to find out what the program does and manually apply the same effects and thus getting the same results. But afterwards it sould be possible to reuse the filters I manually created for the pictures that do not work very well with auto color balance and stuff. And I might be able to re-use these filters for other mags aswell.

So here are my settings and the results:
(left pictures are totally untouched, the right ones have my filters applied)



On *MY* monitor (a mid-end HP TFT) the pictures pretty much look like in the magazine, regarding contrast, colors and hue.
I guess I overdid a little with yellow so you might wanna fix this....

As you can see in the settings screen I created adjustment layers, then added the picture itself below those. The purpose of the empty layer is that I can save the empty picture only consisting of adjustments as a psd-file.

Tell me what you think
hartwig

P.S:
- In my opinion brightness and contrast are not that important, but fixing Exposure, Gamma and most of all Offset will do most of the job!
- I disasseble the mags to avoid blurring at the edges and always try to fix double-pages... and like the results.
- Pages are from CC 176 which I hope I can finish soon

Hartwig, I took the liberty of making a few adjustments to the original scan (the left side picture) in each of the two pictures. I see no reason to use gamma, exposure or offset to make adjustments to each scan, just a bit of saturation, contrast, and of course, the ROC filter which I use extensively.

The thing is, everyone adjusts their scans differently, so what you might do, another person might not do. The finished scan is whatever looks good to the person who scanned the original picture. If you are happy with it, then that's all that matters. What looks good to one person, might look bad to another, so you have to make adjustments that look good to you.

The adjustments I made don't mean that my end result looks better, it just means it looks different.



Last edited by Dekoda; July 14th, 2010 at 06:39 AM..
Dekoda is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dekoda For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 01:42 PM   #56
tuffy
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 566
Thanks: 192
Thanked 12,242 Times in 432 Posts
tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+
Default

I think the pics made by Hartwig look better. Dekoda's pics have a strong white clippning specially pic2.

Here are my versions, made in PS4 with auto level. They have a little red color cast.



Tuffy
tuffy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to tuffy For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 02:57 PM   #57
Darth Joules
Veteran
 
Darth Joules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,531
Thanks: 11,945
Thanked 79,629 Times in 3,160 Posts
Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+Darth Joules 350000+
Default

To paraphrase Dustin Hoffman. I just want to say one word to you. Just one word: curves!

Read and learn (and there are some other very useful bit sized tuts here too):

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...hop-curves.htm

Curves is the most powerful tool in PS at your disposal. It may take a lot of practise to learn how to use it properly and effectively, but it can do a hell of a lot more than color balance, brightness and contrast can together. I will use the latter tools after using curves for any very minor tweaks before final editing. Here's a WIP example (the raw scan is on the right).



I use the levels tool most times to improve the brightness of a scan, though beware of using it if you scanner can only produce 8-bit TIFF files as it may cause color banding. It works best with 16-bit TIFFs. Tip: always save your scans as TIFFs it's the best file quality, especially for color images.

I'll only use hue and saturation when the image scanned has too much saturation of a particular color. Usually I find it's either red/magenta or yellow. I always work using the individual color channels, never the master channel: likewise when using the curves tool.

I agree with what Dekoda has already said, if it looks good to you then it should look good to everyone else, unless their TFT is crap or the veiwer is color blind. Though if you're a profilic scanner (or artist, or photog too) and you have a pretty decent midrange or high end TFT it's worth buying a screen calibrator. The more accurate your screen's output is the less likely it may look crap on a different screen.

And auto color is for amatuer holiday snaps (i.e. it's crap).
Darth Joules is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Darth Joules For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 07:16 PM   #58
hartwig
Veteran Member
 
hartwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 382
Thanks: 1,522
Thanked 34,066 Times in 367 Posts
hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+hartwig 175000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dekoda View Post
I see no reason to use gamma, exposure or offset to make adjustments to each scan, just a bit of saturation, contrast, and of course, the ROC filter which I use extensively.
What is the ROC filter?

Tuffy said your pics have a little clipping (what did you mean, Tuffy?). The pics do not really look like in the magazine but I like your results. But what should you do? Keep it most original to the experience from the actual print or just make it the best you can?

Cheers,
hartwig
hartwig is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to hartwig For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 09:26 PM   #59
Dekoda
Vintage Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 823
Thanks: 20
Thanked 24,247 Times in 822 Posts
Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+Dekoda 100000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hartwig View Post
What is the ROC filter?

Tuffy said your pics have a little clipping (what did you mean, Tuffy?). The pics do not really look like in the magazine but I like your results. But what should you do? Keep it most original to the experience from the actual print or just make it the best you can?

Cheers,
hartwig

Oh, sorry Tuffy. I mentioned the ROC filter is another thread (Scanning and Editing Tips). The Kodak ROC filter is a plugin for Photoshop. I have an old version of it, and I use it at it's default settings.

When you use it, a lot of times it will remove too much color and the picture will look bad. What I do is to use the filter, then use Photoshop's "Fade" function. I fade the effect to zero, then slowly move the slider up till I get the desired effect. I use the ROC filter first, before doing anything else.

As for whether to keep the picture looking like it did in the magazine, I mentioned this in another thread also. This is strictly my opinion, but I feel as if you should make the picture look as good as possible. The reason is because the picture in the magazine is not what the actual photograph looks like. Plus, a lot of lower end magazines don't have good quality control standards, so if you were to buy the first issue of a magazine, the pictures wouldn't look the same as they do in the 50,000 issue of the magazine.

Also keep in mind that most people don't calibrate their monitors. If you edit the picture on a calibrated monitor, and someone else views it on the exact same type of monitor, but it's not calibrated, it will look different. So I figure that I might as well try to make the picture look as good as I can get it since no matter what I do to it, it will look different to everyone.
Dekoda is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Dekoda For This Useful Post:
Old July 14th, 2010, 09:52 PM   #60
tuffy
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 566
Thanks: 192
Thanked 12,242 Times in 432 Posts
tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+tuffy 50000+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hartwig View Post

Tuffy said your pics have a little clipping (what did you mean, Tuffy?).

Cheers,
hartwig
As you can see in the histogram there are both black and white clipping in the picture, the white clipping is stronger. You can see the result on the right hand, light areas which are not in the original picture.



When I made the pictures with auto level, I wanted to show that even auto level works without clipping in this case.

@Darth Joules
I have worked with Photoshop since Photoshop 3. I know Levels and Curves very well, I don't need read and learn!

Tuffy
tuffy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to tuffy For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:03 AM.






vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.1 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.