Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Share #1 Posted June 17, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have scanned a roll of Ektar 100 using Canon 8800F via VueScan in DNG. Scanned images seemed "overpowering" with strong vibrance and saturation. To reduce it, I edited this in LR via the the vibrance and saturation tabs. Questions: 1. Is this a norm with Kodak Ektar 100 (strong vibrance and saturation)? Will Portra 160 NC produce a different result? 2. Is the above method one of many solutions. Any suggestions? My setting in VueScan: Colour tab - I have chosen Kodak - Ektar - 100 Gen 1 (don't know what "Gen 1" means). Thank you in advance for any comments/advice. NB: I am quite happy with the overall results after editing in LR3. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 17, 2014 Posted June 17, 2014 Hi Edwin Ho, Take a look here Kodak Ektar 100. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted June 17, 2014 Share #2 Posted June 17, 2014 Strong vibrancy and saturation is the norm for Ektar. Portra will give you much more natural colours and require a lot less pp 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 17, 2014 Share #3 Posted June 17, 2014 (edited) Colour tab - I have chosen Kodak - Ektar - 100 Gen 1 (don't know what "Gen 1" means). . 'Generic 1', it may be worth you trying it, the Ektar setting is only an approximation and still amounts to somebody else's opinion. Yes, Ektar is a powerful film and it is easy to loose information when scanning it given the high contrast and saturation. The answer as ever with any type of film is not to scan it for a finished image (to be later rescued in Lightroom), but scan it specifically for post processing in Lightroom/Photoshop. So try setting your shadow and highlight clipping points to 0% and make a low contrast scan. It won't look good, you'll think 'this can't work', but you will know that no information has been left out or overdone where at all possible. Often simply importing the flat boring image into Lightroom and pressing 'Auto Contrast' works wonders at this point and gives a very good starting point for further adjustments. However you approach the final step is open, but the tones are all there and just need organising. Steve Edited June 17, 2014 by 250swb 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted June 17, 2014 Share #4 Posted June 17, 2014 Yes I would aim for the best scan to work with LR. Use the histogram to fine tune the prescan settings. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Author Share #5 Posted June 17, 2014 Strong vibrancy and saturation is the norm for Ektar. Portra will give you much more natural colours and require a lot less pp Thank you for confirming that. I've used Portra once before and could see the difference. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Author Share #6 Posted June 17, 2014 'Generic 1', it may be worth you trying it, the Ektar setting is only an approximation and still amounts to somebody else's opinion. Yes, Ektar is a powerful film and it is easy to loose information when scanning it given the high contrast and saturation. The answer as ever with any type of film is not to scan it for a finished image (to be later rescued in Lightroom), but scan it specifically for post processing in Lightroom/Photoshop. So try setting your shadow and highlight clipping points to 0% and make a low contrast scan. It won't look good, you'll think 'this can't work', but you will know that no information has been left out or overdone where at all possible. Often simply importing the flat boring image into Lightroom and pressing 'Auto Contrast' works wonders at this point and gives a very good starting point for further adjustments. However you approach the final step is open, but the tones are all there and just need organising. Steve I set my black point to 0% and white point to 1%, I shall try a 0% on white point in the future. I am quite happy to edit in LR for all my scans. I am a newbie at scanning and gradually learning. Thank you for your input. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted June 17, 2014 Share #7 Posted June 17, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you for confirming that. I've used Portra once before and could see the difference. Well, I expect you would see the difference. Comparison between Ektar and Portra is misleading here as these emulsions have completely different characteristics and are intended for different applications. People who criticise Ektar for being highly saturated with excessive contrast invariably have themselves to blame for making the wrong choice of film in the first place. Ektar is primarily intended as a C41 alternative to E6 and within it's remit does it's intended job exceptionally well, particularly with scenic and illustrative subjects, but you do need to keep an eye on the bias towards reds. Portra is primarily intended for portrait and fashion work where skin tones, smooth tonal transition and contrast control are the primary considerations. Both have very fine grain and scan well. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Author Share #8 Posted June 17, 2014 Well, I expect you would see the difference. Comparison between Ektar and Portra is misleading here as these emulsions have completely different characteristics and are intended for different applications. People who criticise Ektar for being highly saturated with excessive contrast invariably have themselves to blame for making the wrong choice of film in the first place. Ektar is primarily intended as a C41 alternative to E6 and within it's remit does it's intended job exceptionally well, particularly with scenic and illustrative subjects, but you do need to keep an eye on the bias towards reds. Portra is primarily intended for portrait and fashion work where skin tones, smooth tonal transition and contrast control are the primary considerations. Both have very fine grain and scan well. Thank you, I am learning. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Author Share #9 Posted June 17, 2014 BTW, I am scanning negs from Fuji Pro 160 at the moment; will see how it looks in LR later. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted June 17, 2014 Share #10 Posted June 17, 2014 Part of the fascination of film is the learning. It never ends. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin Ho Posted June 17, 2014 Author Share #11 Posted June 17, 2014 Part of the fascination of film is the learning. It never ends. I agree and I am having fun, enjoying every minute of it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted June 17, 2014 Share #12 Posted June 17, 2014 Scan a whole roll in 5 minutes Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.