A hand with VueScan please?

[tgray]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In fact a quick look at the 'DNG' output from VueScan shows absolutely identical file sizes to the TIFF output.

 

This leads me to think that infact the DNG file isn't a raw file in the sense of a Leica M9 style raw file with sensor information and such. Instead I think it is a TIFF with a DNG wrapper around it - in which case I reckon saving as a TIFF will be fine.

 

As far as I know, DNGs are closely related to TIFF files in structure. More importantly, most scanners have full RGB sensors without a Bayer matrix, so you are right, they aren't raw in the sense that a digital camera file is raw. The 'cooking' of a raw demosaics the data, amongst other things.

 

I don't know about Lightroom, but you can edit TIFFs in ACR or Aperture just fine.

[cheewai_m6]

As far as I know, DNGs are closely related to TIFF files in structure. More importantly, most scanners have full RGB sensors without a Bayer matrix, so you are right, they aren't raw in the sense that a digital camera file is raw. The 'cooking' of a raw demosaics the data, amongst other things.

 

I don't know about Lightroom, but you can edit TIFFs in ACR or Aperture just fine.

 

you can do tiff in lightroom as well.

[Advertisement]

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

[andybarton]

You are getting negative images when you scan negatives as RAW because you are scanning a negative. All it's doing is saving the image that it's recorded from the scan without inverting it in the Vuescan software.

 

That's why you need to invert it in Photoshop. If you haven't got Photoshop (even Elements?), then you shouldn't scan negatives in RAW.

 

Scanning slides in RAW is beneficial, IMHO, but I scan my b&w negatives as tiffs and let Vuescan do the inversion as I see no benefit in that extra step. Trying to manipulate a negative image in RAW is very difficult indeed.

[Julian Thompson]

Indeed - the negative problem is solved Andy. It needed the 'save as film' checkbox checking and that cured it. Vuescan now exports as a positive!

 

The TIFFS do indeed edit OK in aperture as tgray says - I initially thought the colour ones would not allow the retouch brush to work but I was wrong.

 

The problem with Aperture and TIFFS is that if you attempt to use the retouch brush on a file bigger than 100mb then it seems to crash. Otherwise it works fine.

 

The Vuescan .DNG files won't open in Aperture though.

 

Now I need to work on colour because where Epson Scan gives good colour from the box the VueScan system isn't doing. Perhaps a calibration thing or maybe I have a setting wrong?

[andybarton]

It helps to calibrate the scanner with a known test print or slide (I have used a Kodachrome one in the past)

 

You also need to adjust the colour settings in the Colour tab. There are some "standards" already there, but when you have adjusted correctly, you can save your own profiles.

 

The learning curve is there, but once you get the hang of it, Vuescan will give you better scans than bog-standard software, IMHO.

[Julian Thompson]

Absolutely - learning is half the fun!

 

What size are you outputting your TIFF's to for editing it Aperture?

[cheewai_m6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i just did a direct test on an epson v500, using vuescan and the epson scanning software. at 1600 dpi, the epson scanning software definitely scans a sharper image than vuescan does. i'm reading a lot of people saying vuescan is superior, and at first, i thought i was as well. but on a direct comparison, it's not.

 

i don't know if i have some settings that aren't optimising vuescan or what, but i've played around with vuescan a lot this past week. maybe the epson software isn't as bad as what a lot of people say it is.

[andybarton]

In Vuescan you can adjust both the focus point within the area that you are scanning, and the sharpening settings.

 

I have not noticed anything other than sharp scans when using Vuescan, but I don't have an Epson scanner, so cannot directly compare with your experience.

[cbretteville]

One important thing to keep in mind when discussing features is that VueScan only exposes the features supported by the scanner attached. Hence I may see options Andy do not, and vice versa, as he has a Nikon and I have a Minolta scanner.

Carl

[Julian Thompson]

I too have spent a long time this week learning Vuescan. It's an excellent piece of software in terms of the options and flexibility. I agree that it is not intuitive so you really need to invest time in reading Ed Hamrick's excellent user information.

 

Despite this, and dispite the undoubted superiority of control of my scanner (V750) using the Vuescan over the Epson Scan software I am having the devils' own job matching the beautiful colours I am seeing from Epson Scan.

 

Right off the bat Epson Scan (which does not appear to have a film specific setting or profiling ability?) comes up with perfect skin tones and almost perfect colours on everything else I have looked at so far.

 

In Vuescan I have tried using an IT8 target to profile the scanner, I have tried using all kinds of different colour spaces, I have tried individually adjusting the brightness of the channels in the scanning software and I have tried to adjust all the other image specifics too. Now I'm not an 'expert' at colour so certainly I was faced with an uphill task but I have worked VERY hard to learn the skill. In the end my Vuescan preset is 95% as good as the Epson Scan one. To qualify this statement what I mean is that the test image has some wood, some skin, a light blue textile, sky, and a red wall (can't post this right now because I'm at work!) - and I can get all but ONE of these things perfect - ie if I get the wood colour a suitably honey hue then the light blue textile goes a bit purple. If I get the wall a nice deep red then the skin goes a bit red - I seem to have tried everything. I mean I've spent probably 10 hours on 1 image to learn this.

 

I have also tried coming straight out of Vuescan with no profiling as a tiff and then doing the above in Aperture using curves. For this, I cheated, and had a look at the curves adjustments that EpsonScan was using to get its results. By copying them as closely as possible and then tweaking again, I got to that 95% point but again I just cannot get it right.

 

So - why do I WANT to nail it with Vuescan?

 

1) The light infra red clean is better than Epson's Digital ICE - in fact it's unbelievably good with no artefacts and convincing repairs even to scratched negatives.

 

2) The ability to downsample TIFFS to a sensible size right in VueScan is brilliant.

 

3) The ability to do multiple passes to average the result and get an even more accurate scan in VueScan is brilliant. Having said this, I can't see any evidence on negs yet that VueScan picks anything up that EpsonScan doesn't but it has promise.

 

So - what I want to ask is this:

 

To those successful with VueScan colours - are you RGB 'experts' who find curve editing to be 'second nature' ? Do you have one preset per film type? Do you profile the scanner, use VueScan presets on the film type and THEN use curves in aperture/LR/ACR etc ? Or do you use no presents and come right into aperture/LR/ACR ?

 

Could someone post me up an example of a processed image on Vuescan? Like a before and after ?

 

I'll try later to put some meat on the bones of this post with images but I wanted to kick the ball off rolling for some comment.

 

TIA

[andybarton]

Are you scanning slides or negatives?

 

I find scanning colour negs a right royal PITA, to be honest. One of the reasons why I don't shoot much C41 any more.

 

There is a hint on here somewhere about profiling your Vuescan settings to get rid of the pink film base for each type of film. Should be accesible via a Search. There are also hints on Flickr for the same thing.

 

With E6 film, I can get the right colour, straight out of the box every time with Vuescan, and b&w begs are just as easy. It's only C41 that gives me a problem.

 

I will scan a C41 neg later today and post the "as scanned" and "as further processed" images, in this thread.

 

But again, I use a Nikon scaner, and not an Epson, so that may have an influence.

[Julian Thompson]

That's brilliant Andy, thanks.

 

My research has been on Kodak Gold 200.

[Julian Thompson]

OK

 

So here are 3 little files.

 

File 1) (Top) Epson Scan. Auto correct in scan software. No adjustments except a quick WB tweak.

 

File 2) (Middle) Vue Scan. This is right from Vuescan. Using built in scanner profile and generic negative setting.

 

File 3) (Bottom) Vue Scan + my work in Aperture on the curves

 

My comment is that I just can't shift that greeny tinge in the woodwork without the baby suit going even more purple. If you look at this compromise setting it's already lost that crisp blue colour it has on the Epson Scan file. Also, look at the skin colour - it's flat compared to the Epson Scan file. The paint on the wall also has a bit of a green cast on the VueScan files and finally the sky outside is 'blue' rather than the correct colour which is the white colour in the Epson Scan file.

 

Now, as I say - I may just be a poor curves editor - can anyone here do any better than me and then tell me what you did?

 

 

PS Edited to say please ignore dust marks and that awful negative scratch. No dust removal or ICE was selected when I did this scan. On the other images from Vuescan look at the amazing correction job the infra red filter did on that scratch! I promise I have not touched it - that's right out of the scanner. If I had used Epson Scan digital ICE then the repair job is about 90% as good as the Vuescan job you see here.

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!

Edited April 6, 2010 by Julian Thompson
Expansion

[andybarton]

Might be a couple of days before I can get to do dome experimentation for you

[Julian Thompson]

No problem- what do you make of the scans above?

[andybarton]

I'm on an iPhone at the moment. Difficult to tell

[Julian Thompson]

Haha yes!

[cheewai_m6]

ok, i can see the benefits of vuescan. but if you're like me, who is just printing to 6x4 or 7x5.5 (at the largest), and because i don't make a living with photography, is it worth all that trouble of learning vuescan? i'm not computer illiterate by any means, but vuescan is royally user unfriendly.

[Julian Thompson]

Honestly it's not cheewai - it's just got a lot of options. Read the user guide in pdf form or better still print it out. The UI is absolutely fine once you get to it.

 

But - when you say you see the benefits - are you referring to my images above? Do you have an opinion you can help me with as I myself am at a bit of a loss !

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[cheewai_m6]

But - when you say you see the benefits - are you referring to my images above? Do you have an opinion you can help me with as I myself am at a bit of a loss !

 

just the things you mentioned. like dust removal, and being able to edit the colour curves. i'm not sure if you can on the epson. but from the interface i've explored on the epson and vuescan, there's a lot more stuff you can adjust on vuescan.

 

personally, i find the epson software 100% adequate for what i need. i'm not saying everyone will be happy with it. but for what i want, and need, the epson software is 100% fine. i tried vuescan because i read from a lot people about how good it is. i'm not prepared to sit through so many hours of trial and error for that tiny bit of benefit. that's all.