So, I'm trying to scan all ~500 of my "best of" slides from my photography career.
It's a long process. Each one takes about 20 minutes to scan, plus up to 30 minutes of rework (because the scanner doesn't get it perfect), per image. That's a lot of work.
Because of that, I am reaching out to the community here: vote on which one you like better, and why. It will drive how I configure the automated image handling, and how I edit my work coming off the scanner.
Before someone says "Hey, different pictures, different looks!", realize that I'm taking that into account, and I'm looking for a far more nuanced opinion that these two pictures let on to.
So, without further ado:
Picture A (links to a semi-huge image):
Picture B (links to a semi-huge image):
For what it is worth, A is a little closer to the actual slide in terms of overall tonality, but B is closer in terms of the highlights. These are both raw from the scanner, except to crop out the "margins" of black from where it picks up the slide holders. These are two scans of the EXACT SAME SLIDE, versus two different slides.
Vote in the comments... help me help myself! (and save me endless hours of furious post editing)
Friday, December 7, 2007
Help Andrew help himself
Posted by Andrew at 3:19 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
DEFINITELY Picture A.
I agree with Ari, B is awful.
Screw this - leave me a message when you get to the best of your beermaking career. I'll help judge that one!
I figured as much. A takes about 1 hour to do, B, 21 minutes. C'est la vie.
I've got two bottles of Founder's Breakfast Stout, Rick, that I'm going to smuggle on the plane flight home with me...
I agree, A is best. This picture always makes me think of Monty Python. Not the actors, but the weird animated sequences where incongruous images are put together and superimposed on a background.
Post a Comment