Dealing with grain

[Maris V. Lidaka Sr.]

I'm starting to scan a roll of film I took about 4 years ago - using Vuescan
on a PC, and scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. My result
looks like way too much grain, whether using Vuescan's grain reduction or
Minolta's - the clumps appear to be slightly larger using the Minolta.

A crop from the scan, at 100% and no adjustments whatsoever, is at

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5917886&size=lg

Any solutions? suggestions? to deal with this?

Maris

 

[tomm42]

I'm starting to scan a roll of film I took about 4 years ago - using Vuescan
on a PC, and scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. My result
looks like way too much grain, whether using Vuescan's grain reduction or
Minolta's - the clumps appear to be slightly larger using the Minolta.

A crop from the scan, at 100% and no adjustments whatsoever, is at

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5917886&size=lg

Any solutions? suggestions? to deal with this?

Maris

What film? How was the scanner set for sharpening? How dense are the
negs? Over exposure in negative film (looked like neg film from the
example) will build your grain, sharpening during scanning will do the
same. If the film had an ISO over 200 there will be a lot of grain,
there are some new ISO 400 films that are better but nothing like ISO
400 digital. Also some film scanners at lower resolutions will clump
grain. Try turning off scanner sharpening, process the image, then
sharpen in Photoshop or other editor.

Tom

 

[Maris V. Lidaka Sr.]

Kodak Advantix 200 film - scanner set for no sharpening. Scanned at the
full 5400dpi.

Maris

 

[degrub]

Have tried scanning at a lower PPI ?

Looks a bit like ccd noise to me, but it is hard for me to be sure. Do
you have a dark frame to scan from this roll ? Noise Ninja might help.
or multisampling, possibly multiscanning and overlaying.

 

[Rob]

Kodak Advantix 200 film - scanner set for no sharpening. Scanned at the
full 5400dpi.

Maris

You can look at it another way using neg film you diffuse the image
through an enlarger to blend/soften the grain, Where as a tranny is
diffused within.

So you will get more grain with a neg. The final scan you can do some
work in say Photoshop.

I have found sometimes its worth scanning the print for a better result.

 

[Alan Browne]

I'm starting to scan a roll of film I took about 4 years ago - using Vuescan
on a PC, and scanning with the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. My result
looks like way too much grain, whether using Vuescan's grain reduction or
Minolta's - the clumps appear to be slightly larger using the Minolta.

A crop from the scan, at 100% and no adjustments whatsoever, is at

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5917886&size=lg

Any solutions? suggestions? to deal with this?

200 Advantix, eh?

I'd blame the film.

What size are you hoping to print?

Bring it into Photoshop from Vuescan or the Minolta s/w. Ignore the
grain. Work the image to "what you want" and give it a gentle USM to
sharpen it up before printing.

 

[Roger S.]

The grain looks fine. If you wanted less grain you'd need to expose
the negative more- too late for that. Using 35mm over APS would also
help. If anything it looks a bit soft- was it in focus?

I'd suggest running noise ninja on the image if you plan to print it
large and the results should be fine.

 

[Maris V. Lidaka Sr.]

Thanks to all. Perhaps I'm just 'hyper' - glad you say the grain looks
fine. I did print out another image from the roll, and the grain was barely
visible. I use NEAT Image myself - started with that and have stuck with
it, but had not applied it to the image posted. Scanned some more today,
using DimageScan - colors a little different, but apparent grain about the
same. Applied NEAT filter in PS - it did help.

The image was in focus - I adjusted contract (Levels), reduced the size and
then sharpened for this result:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5921363

Maris

 

[vance8005]

Did you remove the photos? Photo.net says it's a bad link.

 

[Maris V. Lidaka Sr.]

Sorry - I did: I thought the thread to be ended.

They're reposted now at

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=673019

The one on the left is color-corrected, reduced in size and sharpened for
the web.

The one on the right is as scanned using Vuescan, the Minolta Dimage Scan
Elite 5400 (original model), with no color or tone correction and no
sharpening. A crop from the full scan, of course.

Maris

 

[vance8005]

Sorry - I did: I thought the thread to be ended.

They're reposted now at

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=673019

The one on the left is color-corrected, reduced in size and sharpened for
the web.

The one on the right is as scanned using Vuescan, the Minolta Dimage Scan
Elite 5400 (original model), with no color or tone correction and no
sharpening. A crop from the full scan, of course.

Maris





- Show quoted text -

Thanks. That grain doesn't look too bad to me. I'm working with 30-
year-old Kodachrome 64 slides on a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED
scanner at 4000 spi and the grain seems much worse, especially in the
sky. I'll post an example.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5935792

That's a JPEG of the actual pixels scanned with Vuescan at 4000 spi.
The only manipulation is light infrared cleaning; grain reduction,
sharpening, and color restoration/fading are all turned off for this
example. (Grain reduction doesn't seem to do much in Vuescan
anyway.) The grain doesn't seem nearly as bad in dark areas of other
scans and multiple sampling and multiple exposure don't seem to make
any difference. Scans using NikonScan look about the same, although
I'm not nearly as proficient with NikonScan as I am with Vuescan (or
think I am). I've also noticed that grain is slightly worse in TIF
files because the JPEG compression blurs it a little.

Does this look normal to you? I've run out of ideas to make the
output from the scanning software show less grain. Does anybody have
any suggestions?

Many thanks,
Dave

 

[Maris V. Lidaka Sr.]

Yes - unfortunately it looks normal to me. I suppose that's the nature of
scanning.

The best results seem to come from the slowest film. I shoot negative film,
and my best scans have resulted from Konika Impressa 50 - unfortunately it's
no longer sold though I have a couple of rolls left (I'm saving them for a
very sunny day).

DimageScan has its own "Grain Dissolver", which apparently can be accessed
by Vuescan as well. It works substantially faster using DimageScan than
Vuescan, but the result is about the same and is also about the same as
using Vuescan's own Grain Reduction filter.

Maris

 

[Roger S.]

The Kodachrome grain looks normal. If' it's too obtrusive for you use
Noise Ninja and/or select the sky and do a gaussian blur.

 

[vance8005]

Thanks again, guys. I kinda figured that grain was normal, but I was
hoping for some way to reduce it during the scan anyway. As I
mentioned in the other post, I'm using Noise Ninja now with good
results. Funny thing -- since I've been paying attention to this,
I've been seeing grain/noise in lots and lots of professional images.
It's the kind of thing you really don't notice unless you're looking
for it. Cheers.