I am about to start scanning and processing hundreds of slides and negatives from the last 60 years. I’ve done a good deal of research and purchased a Plustek 8300i film scanner that came with SilverFast 9 Studio version. I purchased that package (as opposed to going the DSLR route) mainly for the IR dust and scratch removal. Here’s the thing, though: I spent hours trying to get the IR removal to work and failed. Then I spent hours trying to get RT to do the same job and failed in that, as well. (I worked with Wavelets, both in Contrast and Denoise and Refine).
So, my question is whether anyone here is relying on their scanner to do this kind of clean up work (I know that Jossie was, years ago). Or, given RT’s progress, perhaps someone has found an effective way to do it in RT. (I know the new Spot Removal tool could do it, but far too slowly!)
Note: yes, I’m considering going the DSLR route, but that’ not a topi for this forum. Here I’m just asking what a reasonable pipeline would be using RT with dusty imported TIFFs.
I have done extensive photo restoration. The IR dust and scratch removal is excellent but only works on color negatives and slides. It doesn’t work on photos or B/W negatives. As for software to remove spots and scratches I depend upon the healing tool in GIMP. I would not use RT or darktable for extensive spot removal although I know DT has a nice retouch module if working with a limited number of areas in an image, but gimp is more suited to scans with lots and lots of spots. Feel free to ask more questions.
@paperdigits Hmmm, this would require me learning not one but two new open source programs, GIMP and G’Mic, and making them work in a Mac OS environment. Possible, but daunting. Love that the tool exists, though.
@Terry Yes, I was attempting the removal on slides with no success. I have contacted SilverFast support with images of my failures. But, as paperdigits, you mention GIMP. Perhaps there’s something to this…
If I could scan using GIMP, or a gmic plug-in to GIMP, and if that scanning employed some kind of IR implementation for my Plustek, then this could really work. But am I understanding all this correctly? I’m used to RawTherapee, so I can handle OS software interfaces and learning curves, but this would all be avoidable if I could just get SilverFast to work at what it’s supposed to do. (Note: it’s also possible that my brand new Plustek is simply not working: the IR clean up doesn’t do much using the scanner’s native software, either).
No you should still scan in your scanning software. Gimp/gmic will process the resulting tiff image.
You can post a scan here and ask people to have a go at removing the scratches.
When I was doing this, there were always two types of dust and scratch removal: that which you could do automatically and that which required manual intervention.
You need to use Silverfast scanning software. GIMP is only for post scan spot removal. I also just remembered and checked online that IR doesn’t work on Kodachrome slides for some reason. This is probably the issue with you.
I also believe Silverfast may have a dust removal function that is not IR based. That may help with your kodachrome scans, but keep the setting low.
Is there not also some thing with ccd vs led scanners and isn’t only one of those able to use ICE for removal… I suppose there could be a simulated process… I thought that some scanners have too shallow a depth of field if that is the right term to effectively use the automated dust removal… I could be completely wrong… just going from something I feel like I read at some point…
@Terry Silverfast now says it does work on Kodakchrome. They have a special tab for it. I tried in Positive and in Kodakchrome and neither really worked. I’ll try an Ektachrome slide and see how it works. And, yes, they have another dust removal tool, but I think it’s primarily for reflective media, not slides/film.
But the main point you’re making is that I still need to use SilverFast and so I really need to make this work. (Though I did a bit of looking and it seems I can use GIMP directly to my Mac; though this still needs investigation.) And, after being daunted by learning GIMP, now I’m kind of excited to try it. If it does RAW processing, how does it compare to RT?
It seems like they have a specialized product for smart removal of defects they call it…
EDIT
Ah I saw the plug-in and thought it was something extra but its built in with a range of features depending on your version of the SF software I guess…
GIMP is not meant to replace RT or DT. RT and DT are non destructive editors and this is great for editing raw files but that non destructive feature slows down the dust, spot and scratch removal processes. GIMP and Photoshop are both destructive editors when it comes to do scratches and spots and that makes them quicker than RT and DT when there are numerous spots to repair. I always work on a duplicate layer in GIMP when removing spots and scratches. Gimp also has an auto level feature which sometimes does magic with faded colours.
If it is not greyed out when you have selected film as the source then it is designed to work with film. I believe I recall using it on film, but I may be mistaken.
Ah, thanks priort and Terry: RT and GIMP are roughly the open source analogues of Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom and Photoshop. I clearly need to start hiking up the GIMP learning curve. Meanwhile, I promise to try SilverFast again, this time using Ektachrome and also experimenting with the SRDx tool that priort mentioned.
@yasuo Thank you for this article. I shall start playing with GIMP and will employ your method.
It’s probably a strong sign that, so far, all the software processing replies to my query have come from folks using GIMP, not RawTherapee. It may just be that RT simply doesn’t have the right tools for that challenge. So it seems that my process will either be:
SilverFast scan TIFF image > GIMP
or
DSLR Raw image > RawTherapee > GIMP
The former saves a step and adds IR dust/scratch reduction. Those two factors, taken together, might sway me, but only if sharpness is adequate.
I have been scanning negatives and slides for years in a photo lab with specialized Kodak equipment. Scratches and dust were removed using Digital ICE technology. Now that I’m retired I use an Epson V600 and an old Epson 4870. I currently use Vuescan and cleaning the slides and negatives works well. BN negatives don’t work. Try downloading the trial version of vuescan and see if it works.
I suppose that raw processors’ main purpose is processing DSLR raw files, so they premise “objectivity” of color or lightness value of image. However, film scanned image may be faded or discolored. Also, it may have many dusts and scratches. Therefor we cannot premise “objectivity” of its value and raw processors are in general insufficient for processing film scanned images.
However, I think using raw processors for final adjustment of them is good idea. I always use raw processor to adjust GIMP edited images.
@yasuo Your work flow is surprising to me. I would imagine that most people use the raw processor first, and when the overall raw image is set (e.g., de-noising, color balance, correction of geometry, etc.), then they go to the fine editing of parts of the image, using GIMP or Photoshop or the like. I never considered going the other direction.
Hello.
VueScan Plustek OpticFilm 8300i Scanner Driver & Software | VueScan Scanner Software seems to work with Kodachrome on an 8300i, according to their specs.
Unfortunately not on Linux.
And you would have to buy a full version (one-time buy, as far as i can see). But they offer a trial version free of charge for tests.
Well I’ve spent another six or eight hours trying to get dust reduction to work. I’ve now downloaded and used VueScan in addition to Silverfast and Plustek’s QuickScan. And damned if I can get any decent results. I attach a comparison grab of two 48bit TIFF files scanned using SilverFast. No IR or software dust removal on the left, both modes employed strongly on the right. No other changes to the image at all. I get similar (lack of) results using Enhance>Despeckle in GIMP. And, days ago, I achieved practically nothing in RawTherapee. I am clearly doing several things wrong. I did, though learn one thing from SilverFast help: they stated that IR dust reduction works best at 2000-32000dpi. This was borne out in my testing: it is more effective at lower resolutions. Of course that defeats one of the main points of a 7200dpi (claimed) scanner.
I would attach a cropped version of the TIF, in case anyone wanted to try to do better. (I can’t believe you could do worse!) But I can’t attach a TIF and I’m not sure what I should attach instead. Happy to learn how if someone wants a go at it.
