Digitized slide is backwards in Lightroom.
Jun 1, 2016 21:30:27 #
Can LR reverse a slide that was digitized backwards? This is not a question of turning it around clockwise or counterclockwise - this is truely inverted. Not only are the signs shown spelled backwards (sdrawkcab) but the sense of balanced composution is all distorted. Do I have to hunt through several thousand slides and do it over correctly, or is there a remedy in LR or some other program that fixes this? Thanks for your help.
Jun 1, 2016 21:38:16 #
Jun 1, 2016 22:01:34 #
folkus wrote:
Can LR reverse a slide that was digitized backwards? This is not a question of turning it around clockwise or counterclockwise - this is truely inverted. Not only are the signs shown spelled backwards (sdrawkcab) but the sense of balanced composution is all distorted. Do I have to hunt through several thousand slides and do it over correctly, or is there a remedy in LR or some other program that fixes this? Thanks for your help.
If you have any Adobe Photoshop or any equivalent photo program move it & you can reverse.
Jun 2, 2016 08:11:02 #
Not backward if you are inside LR and looking out to the user! 
REMEMBER: TO CRITICIZE RELIGION IS OK... BUT NOT ADOBE
REMEMBER: TO CRITICIZE RELIGION IS OK... BUT NOT ADOBE
Jun 2, 2016 08:19:50 #
wkocken
Loc: McGregor, MN
In Lightroom go into the Develop module, click on Photo in the menu and then Flip Horizontal. You can select multiple photos and do them all at once.
Unfortunately there does not appear to be a keyboard shortcut, but maybe someone can suggest a way. I think you'll have to look at each slide individually to determine if it needs to be flipped.
Unfortunately there does not appear to be a keyboard shortcut, but maybe someone can suggest a way. I think you'll have to look at each slide individually to determine if it needs to be flipped.
Jun 2, 2016 08:23:53 #
To flip the photo horizontally, choose choose Photo > Flip Horizontal. This will make a mirror image of the photo.
Jun 2, 2016 10:51:44 #
Jun 2, 2016 15:56:18 #
Depending on what you will use the image for the best option may be to re-scan it. Film scanning is designed to scan the emulsion side of the film and if it was scanned backwards it means the substrate side was scanned. This can leave images slightly soft. If that isn't a problem then flip it and do a little sharpening.
Jun 2, 2016 16:26:50 #
romanticf16
Loc: Commerce Twp, MI
mtbear wrote:
Depending on what you will use the image for the best option may be to re-scan it. Film scanning is designed to scan the emulsion side of the film and if it was scanned backwards it means the substrate side was scanned. This can leave images slightly soft. If that isn't a problem then flip it and do a little sharpening.
It may have been scanned "flopped" because it was a Kodachrome,which has ridges of emulsion visible? Scanning it flopped prevented any distortion in the scan.
Jun 2, 2016 17:45:05 #
LOL
It's all perspective!!!
GT
[qwuote=dpullum]Not backward if you are inside LR and looking out to the user!
REMEMBER: TO CRITICIZE RELIGION IS OK... BUT NOT ADOBE[/quote]
It's all perspective!!!
GT
[qwuote=dpullum]Not backward if you are inside LR and looking out to the user!
REMEMBER: TO CRITICIZE RELIGION IS OK... BUT NOT ADOBE
[/quote]Jun 2, 2016 19:07:12 #
romanticf16 wrote:
It may have been scanned "flopped" because it was a Kodachrome,which has ridges of emulsion visible? Scanning it flopped prevented any distortion in the scan.
I've been involved with photography since 1963, publishing since 1972 and digital photography since 1993 and I've never heard of such a thing. I think it's probably a rationalization for having done the job incorrectly.
Jun 2, 2016 21:07:49 #
romanticf16 wrote:
It may have been scanned "flopped" because it was a Kodachrome,which has ridges of emulsion visible? Scanning it flopped prevented any distortion in the scan.
Always scan Kodachrome backwards and flop it in post. Especially do that when using a scanner with Digital ICE.
Jun 2, 2016 21:09:48 #
mtbear wrote:
I've been involved with photography since 1963, publishing since 1972 and digital photography since 1993 and I've never heard of such a thing. I think it's probably a rationalization for having done the job incorrectly.
The scanner gurus at Eastman Kodak recommended that to pro labs using their Bremson HR500+ scanners about a decade ago. I tried it and it worked perfectly!
Jun 2, 2016 22:53:29 #
burkphoto wrote:
The scanner gurus at Eastman Kodak recommended that to pro labs using their Bremson HR500+ scanners about a decade ago. I tried it and it worked perfectly!
That's good to know, probably will never come up for me
but good to know!
GT
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.