Improve the image quality of your flatbed scans

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Introduction
01:33 Example-Images
03:00 Figuring out the effective resolution of your scanner
05:36 Google Nik-Collection
07:03 Scanning your negatives
09:06 Downscaling your scans
10:04 Color Efex Pro 4
12:47 Output-Sharpening
15:19 Editing Black&White Scans
18:17 Comparison between Effective Resolution & Regular Resolution
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
20:55 Scanning Software like VUESCAN
21:53 Filmholders
27:45 Wet-Mounting
Figuring out the effective resolution of your scanner:
www.filmscanner.info/en
archivehistory.jeksite.org/ch...
Nik Collection:
www.chip.de/downloads/Vollver...
nikcollection.dxo.com/de/#
Google Nik-Collection for GIMP:
www.dpreview.com/forums/threa...
www.techradar.com/how-to/how-...
VueScan-Tutorials:
www.colorperfect.com/scanning...
lenscraft.co.uk/tutorial-tuto...
www.flickr.com/groups/579567@...
Scanning Color-Negatives:
www.iamthejeff.com/post/32/th...
www.coltonallen.com/getting-th...
Filmholders:
shop.lomography.com/digitaliz...
shop.lomography.com/digitaliz...
www.betterscanning.com/
www.ebay.com/itm/Anti-Newton-...
Scanning-Techniques:
www.lighthacking.nl/photograph...
www.fotografische.de/bildbearb...
petapixel.com/2017/02/14/wet-...

[@thomaspopple2291]

Been searching and searching for a good tutorial on getting the best from 35mm scans specifically and all formats generally. This video is by far the most comprehensive easy to follow instructions I have found. Thank you so much for this. You not only describe what you are doing very concisely but you explain why you are doing it. Fantastic!

[@sims234ify]

Thank you so much! Really warms my heart to get such nice feedback! :)

[@deku13qw]

This was the most useful video of post processing your film scans. Thanks a lot for that.

[@sims234ify]

Really appreciate your kind words! Will probably do a video on C41 specifically anytime soon :)

[@willo2457]

I have been hunting about for a VERY long time trying to find a comprehensive guide for scanning by someone is making the most of what they have without all the really expensive software! Really appreciate this - thank you.

[@arcp_]

This video changed my life ✌️

[@lachsimzwaifel]

Thank you for this detailed video. Just getting into scanning again (after shooting some film over the past weeks) and this helped a lot.

[@wichersham]

Great tutorial. Very informative and detailed. Thank you!

[@snitzelll3710]

Really the best scanning tutorial i've seen so far. Thank you very much sir. Danke bitte

[@alexram14]

Amazing video....THANK YOU! I will be sharing this video to my blog!

[@RedPillMode]

Thank you for this, great stuff!

[@derkleineclemens]

such an amazingly detailed and good video, you have serious skills

[@sims234ify]

Thank you so much! Really appreciate the kind words :)

[@RobMoses]

Great video, very helpful information. Thank you for making it!

[@torbjornolsson4851]

Great video! I will get my new Epson V800 today and I'm gonna try all your tips.

[@andytheghosthunter]

Superb!! Thank you. I have the Canoscan9000II and using this method has been a real improvement.

[@sims234ify]

i'm glad I could bear a helping hand!

[@andytheghosthunter]

@@sims234ify Quick question. Why scan at 4800 and then change to 1700, why not just scan at 177 or in the canons cane 1200 dpi?

[@Wijdh]

Very nice and instructive video, thank you!!

[@avistop1]

Thank you man. Very helpful video you made. Thanks again

[@1Dudey1]

Thanks for sharing, very informative.

[@765934]

Great video.

[@ENevada]

Thank you so much❤️

[@23kri]

awesome tutorial mate!thanks so much.

[@sims234ify]

Hey I'm happy that it helped you!

[@DEDZU786]

Very interesting and useful ! Thanks

[@amiruladli1506]

Really good video

[@finn_odriscoll]

Amazing dude

[@TheMercury-13]

Great video, thanks! The correlation between effective resolution & sharpening really surprised me; always assumed the higher the res. the better.. why don't they mention this in the scanner manuals.. *I'd love to see a 'scanning of images', it's why I'm buying a flatbed..

[@dandyvinci]

Very nice.

[@avistop1]

Thanks man.

[@AwesomelyAwesomeO]

Thank you for your video, its extremely helpful! how is your experience with digitaliza so far?

[@psblad2667]

Very good! +++++

[@Ecfilos]

Awesome video!! I'm using an epson v370 and i can't find anywhere the effective resolution

[@annagarncarczyk9889]

Video is helpful but I agree that when you change your DPI to your effective resolution- you make the image super small. So after zooming You bring out pretty, huge, edgy pixels. I wonder if there is a solution in placing film on the scaner, rather than sharpening it in post.

[@JRileyStewart]

Scanning at higher resolutions has benefits you didn't mention, and the only downside you mention is "bloated files." Regarding the 'bloated files' issue... Terabyte drives are cheap (2021), so excessively large files aren't nearly the issue they were in 2018. Regarding the benefits of high resolution files, there are two: The first is that as you process the image, there are many more pixels to twist and bend, and the amount of "picket fencing"and other processing artifacts you'll get is much less because of those extra pixels. Second, the greater the pixel dimension, the larger the prints possible at 300 dpi. Both benefits are worth scanning at high resolution and only downsize when exporting the files to a particular use (i.e., social media, books, or prints). I've always viewed the use of the AF Target somewhat suspiciously, since it was released in 1951 and likely not that relevant to modern lenses, films, and scanners. Plus, it is highly subjective and open to interpretation when one individual is making the reading. In other words, my eyes aren't as good as yours, or my monitor isn't as clear as your retina monitor, so my readings and conclusions will be very different than yours. That makes a single-user application of the AF Target pretty arbitrary, imo, just because it's so subjective among individuals. Oh, and things like sharpening and contrast adjustments can drastically affect the readings from the AF Target as well. This is the only explanation why Silverfast might appear to get a higher resolution than Epson Scan, that is, Silverfast uses a different built-in post-process of the image than Epson Scan, yielding a different reading of the AF Target. My advice is to scan as big as possible, process the image, then downsize depending on the application of the image.

[@Eigil_Skovgaard]

Is a 120 color negative that superior to the resolution and tonal range of a modern censor, e.g. the Sony A7 series, that it makes sense to struggle with the wet darkroom and the scanner before you end up in Photoshop anyway?

[@coby.travis]

Anyone know what's the effective resolution of a V700?

[@rjw_inc9477]

Nice tutorial, how can i change the effective resolution in Lightroom before I work on the image ?

[@EMGKPhotographie]

martin jeffery I wonder also

[@flvbbernvggets]

All the hate for the V600, lol. My MF scans always come out so crisp, you can literally see the stitching in clothes.

[@47951]

Is it Nik collection available for mac? I have troubles installing it :( help

[@maktin2447]

Nick collection does not appear on my filter window when installed. What should I do?

[@Flying4Film]

The issue I'm running into is the scanning website says for my Plustek 8200i the effective resolution is 3250, and that I need to scan at 7200 ppi to achieve that. I gave it a shot and when I go to down sample to 3250 dpi in photoshop, it makes the image enormous. Anyone know what I'm doing wrong? Am I misreading something in the process?

[@maximilianomagnano2267]

I think you should check Resample on the image size window

[@Dr_Pessimisto]

Unfortunately nik sharpener brings a lot of color noise to the image...

[@prodbyscars]

Hi I install the Nik collection however it's faded out in the filters and I can't click on it

[@sims234ify]

You have to set the color mode to RGB and make sure you selected the picture in the layers tab.

[@prodbyscars]

@@sims234ify that worked thank you!

[@DEDZU786]

Downloading Google Nik for Windows gets a non execution file ...

[@fuglong]

Nik collection is now $150 :(

[@eladbari]

When you change your DPI to your effective resolution- you make the image super small. I understand there might be double pixels, but lowering it to a resolution of 1000x2000 pixels is a bit harsh. What if you wanna spread an image full screen? Or print it out? Why not keeping it around 6000x4000 pixels?

[@bigcat3342]

Nik collection link is dead.

[@sims234ify]

fixed.

[@bigcat3342]

@@sims234ify Thanks! not sure if there's a glitch, but im using a mac and when i apply pro contrast, the app crashes.

[@bigcat3342]

nvm i got it! thanks

[@xXAtomicSkittlesXx]

@@bigcat3342 how did you fix the crash problem ?

[@Sco1t19]

Wow 1700 ppi. that's pretty bad? I have a old DiMAGE Dual II from the 90s and it's optical resolution is 2820ppi.

[@SmalltimR]

Two words: fluide mount - the end

[@user-xd3jr4ze7n]

turd