So I’ve been having problems with little smatterings of dust on most of my scans. And the scanner I use doesn’t have Digital ICE (it’s an old Minolta - keepin’ it real). After using a few of the available software-based anti-dust systems out there, I remained unconvinced. On the discussion boards, people were saying to do it by hand. For bigger bits, sure, but a billion tiny grains…?

I decided it was simple to do better. I wrote (in the loosest sense) a Photoshop action which reduces dust, but doesn’t remove all the grain from the photo.

It is does all this with a difference matte made from the original (dusty) image, and a version that has been run through the Photoshop Dust & Scratches filter. Old school like.

It aint fancy.

But it is fast and reliable. Also, it doesn’t get rid of all the dust (yep, paint it). But will remove all that cocaine you chopped up on your negatives the night before… Or if you are more like me, the baby powder that they seem to sprinkle all my negs with when they leave the lab.

This is an excellent digital camera theory primer.

Cambridge in Colour

With everyone getting into a lather over DI, it is worth bearing in mind that when you have material on tape (or Quicktime) and edit it offline using timecode… then your data (DI material) needs to be matched back to that same timecode when you do the online conform.

You would think that this is obvious, but after hearing a recent horror story about an established post company failing to do that, I think it is worth spelling out a couple of techniques which will save a lot of eye-matching pain.

First, the easy way. The DPX file format has a place to save the timecode information inside it. The downside is that a lot of programs ignore this. Stop here if you are lucky enough to have one that does.

Second, the brute force method. First a bit of hoary theory, from me:

Think of timecode as just a frame counter, which uses the format of time, like a digital clock, to count. The lowest increment is a frame; then seconds; minutes; and hours.

Just like you can calculate the number of seconds in an hour (60 secs x 60 minutes); you can calculate the number of frames in an hour (e.g. 24 frames* x 60 secs x 60 minutes). Therefore, you can express a timecode as a number of frames.

For example 02:10:10:04 (24 fps) = 187444 frames.

So then, if you were to put that into a typical DPX sequence:

myfilm.00187444.dpx = myfilm (frame 02:10:10:04)

*The only important thing to remember is what frame rate you are dealing with (30 or 25 or 24 etc).

A lot of compositing and DI packages are able to translate frame numbers into timecode (RED Cine does this, Flame, Shake, After Effects, Film Master all do it too). It makes the transition between tape or Quicktime and sequences of images very easy. It also means you are not ripping your hair out when it comes to doing a conform.

Of course, this isn’t a new way of working, nor is it rocket science. If you are acquiring on film and scanning, or using one of those new-fangled digital cameras, it is all the same.

Don’t panic.

And if that seems like incomprehensible rubbish, it probably is. If you are still with me, then try this.