Some people are amaze by my scanning quality. My image sensor (slide film) has an area of 24x36 mm, quite a large surface to record fine details. It is twice the surface of most digital sensors. Remember the time when people used to say that medium format cameras were a lot better than 35mm cameras because surface of film is about 3-4X larger. Same idea here.
I scan at 2400 dpi (I could go to 4800 but don't believe my flatbed scanner could really deliver it with the glass). 24x36 mm is about 1x1½ inch. So resolution becomes
2400 pixels X 3600 pixels = 8.5 MPix (about)
Quite a high resolution to start with when you consider we present our image on TN at about half Mpixel. I also scan at 16 bits/color to record as many details in shadows and highlights as possible. This way I have plenty of lattitude in PP to deliver the maximum out of my slide films.
Of course I can't do that with a bad slide. An over or under exposed image can be improve in PP, but will never make a great picture. Same for sharpness. Often people believe I have noise in my images, most of the time it's the grain structure the are seeing, and I do not correct grain with NI, grain belongs to my pictures as it did in the past.
I hope I didn't reveal to many of my precious scanning secrets ;o)
About Favorite, I guess some of them deserve this title. But, it's also part of the "Scratch my back and I scratch your back" theory. Isn't it the way we collect points on TN. Of course we do that with the best images first, and sometimes with newcomers to encourage them.
Thank you for your kind comments.
Lizardfish (76) *