<![CDATA[Redump Forum — Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> 2010-03-13T18:16:46Z PunBB http://forum.redump.org/topic/4734/scanner-calibration-for-artwork-scanning/ <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> huygens what software is the one in the first post? and can you post a more detailed guide?

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/10181/ 2010-03-13T18:16:46Z http://forum.redump.org/post/24074/#p24074 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> Amazing stuff huygens big_smile

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/4223/ 2009-07-18T14:49:00Z http://forum.redump.org/post/19376/#p19376 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> That looks really really good.  I can't wait to collect your scans. smile

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/4656/ 2009-07-02T07:32:39Z http://forum.redump.org/post/19077/#p19077 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> This looks great... consistency is good. Thanks again. I will be on the look out for IT8.7 reflective target after the move.

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/700/ 2009-07-02T01:47:18Z http://forum.redump.org/post/19076/#p19076 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> Images updated.

Method:
Scan at 600 dpi (no color correction)
Appy color profile
Apply Descreen 4.0 filter ($20 for the home version)
resize to 300 dpi using "bicubic sharper"
Fix damage with rubber stamp tool
save as png (large but better than tiff while still being lossless).

Note for archival purposes 300 dpi makes sense as the halftone screen frequency is 145lpi therefore 300dpi is just over twice the screen resolution. The res nees to be more that the halftone resolution because of the non-halftone parts of the image (playstation logos/ text).

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/4339/ 2009-07-01T23:49:45Z http://forum.redump.org/post/19075/#p19075 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> Ok, I will...I'll also ask my photographer friends if they have something like that. cool

Hopefully that program works with my old Compaq S200 lol.

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/700/ 2009-06-23T06:42:02Z http://forum.redump.org/post/18909/#p18909 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> I got mine off ebay for $15 I'd look there first. I don't know about shipping but there's a German company that sells them for $10.00. http://www.targets.coloraid.de/ Any IT8.7 reflective target will work. The Q-60 is the kodak number for their IT8.7 targets.

IT8.7 Wikipedia page

The corrected image looks much more like the original. It is indeed a blue sky not a purplish one.

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/4339/ 2009-06-23T06:13:05Z http://forum.redump.org/post/18908/#p18908 <![CDATA[Re: Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> That should definitely be added to the guide with the corrected you can tell it's sky blue in the background and not that purplish blue. But how much did that cost you looking at the prices I've seen between $40 to $100 for it. Though I went through the first 10 pages only.

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/700/ 2009-06-23T04:00:04Z http://forum.redump.org/post/18906/#p18906 <![CDATA[Scanner Calibration for artwork scanning]]> Updated: I got access to a second scanner to compare the calibration to ensure consistancy accross scanners:

Raw Canon scanner output:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3630/3680170586_5d1f9606af.jpg

Raw Epson scanner output:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2457/3680171744_a56328f0cc.jpg

Corrected canon Image:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2255/3680171030_4eeca12a53.jpg

Corrected Epson Image:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3654/3679358055_2bd818f190.jpg


So other than the Epson being a much better scanner, calibration does ensure consistancy :-)

Still working on it but heres a cover using my current scan settings:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/29612438@N … 9/sizes/l/
check out the grass!

]]> http://forum.redump.org/user/4339/ 2009-06-23T00:32:41Z http://forum.redump.org/post/18903/#p18903