VueScan issue: RAW DNGs become much more saturated than TIFF

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everybody

 

I have run into a situation. I am scanning Velvia RVP100 on a Nikon Coolscan V ED using the latest version of VueScan.

 

Since my workflow is to work with DNGs, which I open in Camera Raw and then in Photoshop, I only save RAW DNG files to which the infrared cleaning has been applied. In other words, I don't use TIFF files.

 

I have noticed that the RAW DNGs when opened in Camera Raw are very saturated, much more so than 1) how they look in VueScan and 2) how a TIFF of the same scan with identical settings look.

 

See these examples.

 

The first is a screenshot of the RAW DNG open in Camera Raw. It is very saturated.

 

The second is a screenshot of that same image open in VueScan just after it has been scanned. This image is not particularly saturated.

 

The third is the same scan saved as TIFF version (but converted to JPG for upload here). It looks much like the scan in VueScan even though it is slightly more saturated than the second image.

 

I've tried numerous settings in VueScan, such as various types of Color Balance, white and black points, and tweaking the R, G and B, but I can't mimic the much less saturated, and imho more pleasant, look of the TIFF.

 

I also can't find a reason why VueScan would display the RAW DNG in a much more pleasing and less saturated way than when the same file is opened in Photoshop.

 

Any assistance is very gratefully accepted.

 

Kind regards

Philip

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[erl]

Philipus, I don't know if this will help you, but worth a try.

 

When using VueScan, which is excellent by the way, I treat it as purely scanning software because that's what it is designed for. I don't do any manipulations or correction with it because Photoshop is designed for that and does a better job. ie. use software for what it is designed.

 

When scanning, set your Black point and White point wide apart to fit the entire histogram in. This will render a very flat looking scan, but captures all the detail available on the film. If you do any adjustments in VS, this will throw away some info and you can't get it back. Now I assume because you are scanning to RAW (which I don't usually do) you must be getting unprocessed data on the colour part of the file. How VueScan shows it does not matter IMO. Camera RAW will give you the facility to control and balance the colour, as well as the BP and WP which must now be set correctly, in PS.

 

Providing you can achieve the balance of colour and tone you want, this should be the best quality way of PP.

 

I hope this helps, but other posters will probably come with better advice.

 

When time permits, I will try to simulate what you are doing and see what I get.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tgray]

All I can say is don't use DNGs. Just use Tiffs. You know you can bring tiff files into Camera Raw and edit them there, right?

 

It probably has something to do with colorspaces. What colorspace do you have Camera Raw setting after it converts? If it's something particularly wide, like wider than AdobeRGB, you might get what you are seeing.

[250swb]

I agree with erl that you should just aim to get all the information from a scan that you can, and leave any manipulations until the next stage. The way I treat a scan is to go for a lower contrast image, slightly subdued colour, and just make sure no tones are getting clipped. It looks horrible, but all the information is in the file. Save as an aRGB (or ProPhoto RGB) TIFF. Then with Photoshop or your chosen post processing software you can make the image how you want it to be.

 

Steve

[philipus]

Thanks for replying Erl. I agree - Vuescan is only a way of getting the images in digital form, not a piece of editing software.

 

When scanning, set your Black point and White point wide apart to fit the entire histogram in.

 

I have played around with the BP and WP. It seems both should be set to zero to capture as much as possible - does that make sense? I've seen various info about the BP and WP on the internet so I'm a bit unsure.

 

Kind regards

Philip

[philipus]

Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it.

 

All I can say is don't use DNGs. Just use Tiffs.

 

Why? I have more options in ACR using DNGs.

 

You know you can bring tiff files into Camera Raw and edit them there, right?

 

Yes I know this, but afaik one has to do it form within Bridge and I am not always in Bridge when I am scanning. Perhaps there's an easier way? 10.7 won't let me pick ACR as application to open TIFFs with.

 

It probably has something to do with colorspaces. What colorspace do you have Camera Raw setting after it converts? If it's something particularly wide, like wider than AdobeRGB, you might get what you are seeing.

 

ACR is set to AdobeRGB which is also what is set as Output Color Space in VueScan.

 

cheers

Philip

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks Steve. I also wish to have as much information in the scan as possible. Do you also set the white and black points as far apart as possible or do you use other settings to create the low contrast, dull image?

 

Cheers and thanks again

Philip

[erl]

The way to set the BP and WP is in the 'Prefs' tab. Select 'Graph Type' as 'B/W'. This setting then gives you the tiny movable triangles under the graph that you can slide to the widest limit of the histogram graph.

 

This will ensure maximum capture of data from the film, which you then can optimize in your software of choice, eg. Photoshop.

 

As previous posters have said, scan to Tiff rather than DNG. You can save the original Tiff as a Master if you wish and save separately when changes are applied.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Note that this image is 'flat' and also 'blue'. Perfect correction is completed in Photoshop to increase contrast and correct colour cast. Very quickly done.

[philipus]

Thanks Erl. I appreciate it.

As previous posters have said, scan to Tiff rather than DNG. You can save the original Tiff as a Master if you wish and save separately when changes are applied.

I am still trying to figure out why I should use TIFF rather than DNG.

[erl]

Thanks Erl. I appreciate it.

 

I am still trying to figure out why I should use TIFF rather than DNG.

 

Look at it this way. Why use DNG instead of Tiff? Tiff is easier to work with from a scan and is lossless, unlike jpegs, which are still very good for many applications.

 

I have found no disadvantage in using tiffs, but like you, I do struggle with scanned DNG's. Dng's are fine straight out of the camera and can be re-processed many times into the future. I treat my film as the DNG with reference to scanning. It can always be re-scanned, and I often do as my skill at scanning increases.

[philipus]

Look at it this way. Why use DNG instead of Tiff?

That's a nice out-of-the-box way of seeing it

 

I treat my film as the DNG with reference to scanning. It can always be re-scanned, and I often do as my skill at scanning increases.

Yes, you're right, of course, the neg/slide is the raw image.

 

I will play around a bit with TIFFs and see where I end up. I did notice that they look much more like the slide.

 

Cheers

Philip