Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm just in the process of scanning one of my old BW negatives. Using Vuescan and importing into LR3. For a largeish print, scanning as tif gives me a file of 96Mb, whereas scanning as dng gives just 18Mb. Obvious choice, I thought.

 

But …. The output from Vuescan as a tif is a positive, as expected. The dng file, however, with the same settings, comes out as a negative. And I can't find any way of inverting it either in Vuescan, or in LR3. Am I missing something?

 

And please don't tell me to buy PS.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this help? Google search will show other methods.

Update: Inverting Your Images in Lightroom 3

 

Later: Yes, clever, works for me with colour image just as described.

 

That is just toooo clever. Why didn't I think of that? And of course simple, and logical. Obviously not the kind of thing that Adobe would put in their help file. I'm going to keep an eye on that Laura. Thanks for the tip.

 

David

 

P.S. Just tried this, but there are no points at the extremities of the linear curve, and no obvious way of adding them.

Edited by DavidStone
addition
Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this help? Google search will show other methods.

Update: Inverting Your Images in Lightroom 3

 

Later: Yes, clever, works for me with colour image just as described.

That's bad advice. The principle is correct but the curve is too simple. You will get terrible tones and colours that way. Rather than a straight line from top left to bottom right—i. e. {(0, 255); (255, 0)}—better use a curve similar to this:

 

{(0, 255); (32, 80); (64, 32); (128, 16); (192, 6); (255, 0)}

 

... that is, a curve that looks similar to a hyperbola (or the upper half thereof). This non-linear curve will yield more natural tones and colours with most colour negative films. Each film will need slightly different settings so use this curve as a starting point only—but the basic shape should always be hyperbolic.

 

When scanning negatives (colour or black-and-white) then aim for a scan that looks rather flat and is on the darkish side. If your scanner has settings for a 'linear' scan then use these.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this help? Google search will show other methods.

Update: Inverting Your Images in Lightroom 3

 

Later: Yes, clever, works for me with colour image just as described.

 

A new day here in northern Europe, and I took your advice on a Google search. Plenty to chew over. I'll get there eventually.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've had a play with Vuescan and think I have the answer.

 

On the output tab option "Raw output with" should read "Save", and then check the "Raw save film" box.

 

That should give you correct DNG files.

 

There's a bit of a mystery here. A couple of days ago I sent a question about this to Ed Hamrick, and got a brief answer which seemed to say the same as you have said.

 

But when I go to the Output tab, I've got Tif DNG, but there's no RAW option. And I have got, according to the app. info., the pro edition.

 

Am I missing something obvious (it has been known)?

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, but I've kind of solved it. I changed Font Size to 12 in the prefs tab, because it was set to 16 for some reason. Back in output, suddenly there is the RAW option. As a matter of interest, I changed back to 16 again, and the RAW option is now there, large as life. I promise you I looked very carefully and that tab was definitely not there. And I only had half a glass of beer at lunchtime.

 

A minor bug perhaps, or even a gremlin?

 

Looks like we're up and running.

 

David

 

P.S. I have the current edition of Vuescan, just updated, and this was the first time I'd opened the update.

Edited by DavidStone
addition
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just move the curve to top left to bottom right.

 

Yes, I finally worked out how to add the points to enable me to do that - I actually had to resort to reading the instructions. And I saved it as "invert".

 

But of course all the processing procedures are reversed. So I think that the Vuescan option might be the one to use.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Sharif
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!Tiefgaragenausfahrt by Herr Sharif, auf Flickr
       
      Bessa, Color Skopar 3.5/28, Trix 400@1600
       
      Sharif
    • By Sharif
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!Hallo Grobspanplatte! by Herr Sharif, auf Flickr
       
      Leica M2, Leica Elmarit 2.8/28 asph, Kodak Trix 400, Ilford Ilfotec LC29, Plustek Opticfilm 7600, Vuescan
       
      Sharif
    • By mnutzer
      "Where's my Coke?" 

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden! 
      ・  Leica IIIa syn  ・  'cron 50 coll.  ・  AGFA-Scala  ・  Nikon Coolscan  ・  Vuescan  LrPsCC  ・  Academy fountain  ・  Palace Park  ・  Stuttgart  ・  Germany  ・  March 2016.  ・

       
    • By plasticman
      I'm considering the hitherto unthinkable: switching from Vuescan to Silverfast. I just want some opinions from users of Silverfast.
        Background: I've been pretty satisfied with Vuescan the last few years. But one scenario in particular exposes a problem I keep having trying to export totally flat, linear, color-negative scans: when the entire image is high-key (over-exposed or simply an image that's intentionally just one narrow section of the full tonal range), I find that pretty much nothing I do will give me a scan that is correctly flat and at the same time only fills the correct part of the histogram. Instead of this, the tones get redistributed across the entire range of the histogram - which gives a highly contrasty scan where the opposite is what I intended. There may be workarounds - if you know how to fix this let me know - but my aim is to always simply export the flattest, linear, most neutral *batch* scan without needing to tweak output on a single-image basis. I find ColorPerfect, PhotoShop and Lightroom are all better at manipulating color and contrast etc than Vuescan, and I'd prefer to keep the scanning software out of the image-manipulation process, as far as possible.   This is where my experiments with the latest Silverfast demo come in: the output scans are all much flatter, and maybe more boring. But that's what I want! They also sometimes seem to find slightly more color 'nuance' in things like masses of leaves in a forest of trees. This is a difficult thing to be sure about, as the color is influenced by the tonality.   Anyway, the extra bonuses are that the scans are much faster. They also have slightly sharper characteristics at 100% view - though they don't actually extract more detail than Vuescan at 4000dpi (so possibly just USM - if so, I'd love to know how to switch it off, as I don't want the software to do any pre-processing).   I'm still looking and comparing the two softwares, and I'm not sure yet, but there are definitely things that bother me about Silverfast:   - the price-gouging structure - the censored support forum (and the often dismissive tone of the 'help') - the crazily unintuitive and unhelpful (and downright ugly) interface - this gets in the way of everything.  - the program often does something (like a prescan) when you simply close an interface element (like the frame-finder function) - the lack of any in-depth documentation - apart from a third-party book that they sell(!!) you on their site - the general feeling that the company don't give a **** about their users   I'd like to hear from people who use the software - especially with scanners like the Coolscan range - and are actually happy with it (or unhappy for specific reasons).
    • By mnutzer
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
×
×
  • Create New...