Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Share #1 Posted February 28, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) V700 and C41 colour negatives: I obtain RAW TIFFs using this method. I often achieve acceptable results using the following method adjusting separate RGB channels and curves in Capture NX2. START 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! INVERT ALIGN BLACK FOR EACH RGB CHANNEL SEPARATELY (OR CHOOSE BLACK POINT IF SOME NEGATIVE BACKING IS SHOWING). ALIGN WHITE FOR EACH RGB CHANNEL SEPARATELY ADJUST RGB BLACK/WHITE POINTS FOR CONTRAST Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! INVERT ALIGN BLACK FOR EACH RGB CHANNEL SEPARATELY (OR CHOOSE BLACK POINT IF SOME NEGATIVE BACKING IS SHOWING). ALIGN WHITE FOR EACH RGB CHANNEL SEPARATELY ADJUST RGB BLACK/WHITE POINTS FOR CONTRAST ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1602691'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Hi Stealth3kpl, Take a look here Scanning Consistency (Warning: Pictures). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share #2 Posted February 28, 2011 MID GREY 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! CONTRAST CURVE Do these results look ok to you? Is there something else I should be doing? What do you do when there's no mid grey on which to click? My results are sometimes quite variable. These look ok to me: Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! CONTRAST CURVE Do these results look ok to you? Is there something else I should be doing? What do you do when there's no mid grey on which to click? My results are sometimes quite variable. These look ok to me: ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1602701'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted February 28, 2011 However, I often find there're pics I just can't deal with. These two frames for example. Is it more than coincidence that they're on the same film strip? Do you think the problem could lie in their development? Colour shifts? 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! Any advice welcome. Pete Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Any advice welcome. Pete ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1602707'>More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted February 28, 2011 Share #4 Posted February 28, 2011 "Do these results look ok to you? Is there something else I should be doing? What do you do when there's no mid grey on which to click? My results are sometimes quite variable. These look ok to me": Nice work Pete ! It's also OK for me Best Henry For the latest pictures, what film ? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted February 28, 2011 Thanks Henry, but sometimes the results look just awful. Take these for instance: 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! I'd like to be able to achieve results like "ddp" (I believe this is Ektar 100). Pete Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I'd like to be able to achieve results like "ddp" (I believe this is Ektar 100). Pete ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1602738'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share #6 Posted February 28, 2011 A little more colour balancing improved things, I think. 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! Any thoughts on how I can improve or is my general workflow ok? Pete Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Any thoughts on how I can improve or is my general workflow ok? Pete ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1602774'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted February 28, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) For the latest pictures, what film ? Thanks The last two wierdly coloured pictures were Ektar 100 on the same strip. I suspect it was poorly developed. It was only this evening I realised these were from the same strip. The seashell pic was also Ektar but from another film another time. The first (butler) and third (top hat) were Portra 160 NC. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted February 28, 2011 Share #8 Posted February 28, 2011 Pete, if it varies, it could also come from the shot right ? or come from the development ? On my negatives and in the same roll , I could have very contrasting pictures and others not ! It's just a question. The Ektar 100 has in principle a good contrast and vibrant colors like here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/160651-epson-v700-750-very-good-our-6.html Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Ryan Posted February 28, 2011 Share #9 Posted February 28, 2011 Pete - thanks for running through that first exercise. Really good. Unfortunately I have not idea about the ones you describe as problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 1, 2011 Share #10 Posted March 1, 2011 However, I often find there're pics I just can't deal with. [...] Do you think the problem could lie in their development? Colour shifts? The problem seems to be the blunt linear inversion and the subsequent drama with the RGB channels to fix the damage after the fact. You are aware of C F System's ColorNeg and ColorPerfect plugins, so why don't you just use these? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share #11 Posted March 1, 2011 The problem seems to be the blunt linear inversion and the subsequent drama with the RGB channels to fix the damage after the fact. You are aware of C F System's ColorNeg and ColorPerfect plugins, so why don't you just use these? Sometimes I don't like their conversion. I'm also aware that most film users don't use ColorPerfect but get very nice results. My question, the point of this thread, is am I doing what most film users do when scanning? Is my workflow shown here typical of what most people do or is there something I'm not doing right or not doing at all? Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 1, 2011 Share #12 Posted March 1, 2011 Firstly, most film users don't use the Nikon software, so your examples are unfamiliar to most users. Secondly, most users, I would think, don't scan as RAW. I have looked at a demo of ColorPerfect and threw it away within half an hour. The interface is so confusing and complicated. I scan as a positive tiff, bring into Photoshop, and do all my adjustments there. I do adjust levels in colour channels when necessary, as well as curves and luminance levels. Alternatively, I scan E6 and don't have any of these problems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 1, 2011 Share #13 Posted March 1, 2011 Sometimes I don't like their conversion. There are more than enough degrees of freedom—inside and outside the plugin—to adjust the result if you don't like it initially. In any case, ColorPerfect's result always is a better starting point than Photoshop's linear inversion which is totally wrong for turning the image from a colour negative film into a positive image. I'm also aware that most film users don't use ColorPerfect but get very nice results. Why do you care what others use or don't use? Most people use colour transparency film and get good scan results, or use colour negative film and get poor scan results. Home-made scans of colour negatives are virtually always immediately recognised as such due to the weird colours. I have looked at a demo of ColorPerfect and threw it away within half an hour. The interface is so confusing and complicated. I have looked at a demo of NegPos (the predecessor to ColoPerfect's predecessor) and purchased it within 20 minutes. The result are so fantastic and better than anything else. I agree about the poor interface—and that of NegPos used to be even worse—but it's the results that count. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share #14 Posted March 1, 2011 Why do you care what others use or don't use? I'm obviously not explaining myself clearly. As I say, I'm trying to determine if my process is correct or if there is some obvious mistake I'm making or not including. I'm not so interested in whether or not some one once tried it and gave up because it seems to me that some have tried it and succeeded. I'm not interested in E6 or digital. I'd like to determine whether or not it is possible to process a RAW TIFF using a PP program like NX2 or Photoshop and how the method differs from mine. I'd like to hear from those that are happy with their scans but aren't using ColorPerfect. Of course, if the answer is that it is impossible to obtain proper colour balancing by the method I have shown then I'd like to know. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 1, 2011 Share #15 Posted March 1, 2011 It is possible to do it (process RAW in PS). I have done it, but didn't really see much of an advantage over scanning as a tiff. It's actually pretty hard to see what you are doing when the RAW is a negative. Getting a C41 scan looking right is hard enough as it is, without having to think in negative... Maybe I have missed where Raw Converter will invert a RAW file before making RAW adjustments, which would obviously make things much easier, but, to my mind, the advantages of RAW are not there in scans, where they are there in proper RAW files from a digital camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share #16 Posted March 1, 2011 The problem seems to be the blunt linear inversion and the subsequent drama with the RGB channels to fix the damage after the fact. You are aware of C F System's ColorNeg and ColorPerfect plugins, so why don't you just use these? Sometimes I don't like their conversion. I'm also aware that most film users don't use ColorPerfect but get very nice results. My question, the point of this thread, is am I doing what most film users do when scanning? Is my workflow shown here typical of what most people do or is there something I'm not doing right or not doing at all?Pete For example, the first conversion here is ColorPerfect. Note the black clipping. Less pronounced in the workflow I've outlined above (Pic 2) 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/145296-scanning-consistency-warning-pictures/?do=findComment&comment=1603225'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share #17 Posted March 1, 2011 It is possible to do it (process RAW in PS). I have done it, but didn't really see much of an advantage over scanning as a tiff. It's actually pretty hard to see what you are doing when the RAW is a negative. Getting a C41 scan looking right is hard enough as it is, without having to think in negative... Maybe I have missed where Raw Converter will invert a RAW file before making RAW adjustments, which would obviously make things much easier, but, to my mind, the advantages of RAW are not there in scans, where they are there in proper RAW files from a digital camera. My frustration is usually with clipping at both ends when following your method. I also find it very time consuming adjusting each frame at the scanner. The preview windows of EpsonScan, SiverFast and VueScan seem inadequate for colour balancing. With the raw method you just draw all the info off to process later. Many people advocate no colour balancing with scanner software but get the info the process in PP. My question is how? Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 1, 2011 Share #18 Posted March 1, 2011 I don't get any clipping at the ends of the curve when I scan negatives. Indeed, I find it difficult to get a full width curve sometimes, as you have in your scans at the top of this thread. I sometimes scan "neutral" and do all colour processing in PS, but more often, use the "Generic" colour negative option in Vuescan, which gives a reasonable starting point. I never use any other scanning software. Scanning software isn't really designed to do proper colour balancing - that's what you have Photoshop for. The best you can hope for is a reasonable first stab. The scanning software is merely a means to an end - getting an image from the film and into the computer. I will do screen shots of my workflow with C41 if you wish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 1, 2011 Share #19 Posted March 1, 2011 Of course, if the answer is that it is impossible to obtain proper colour balancing by the method I have shown then I'd like to know. I tried real hard to get good colours in my colour negative scans, and didn't succeed until I tried the NegPos/ColorNeg/ColorPerfect family of plugins. Your issue with the clipped shadows in the example shown above sure isn't intrinsic to ColorPerfect but rather a problem with the scan exposure or the black point setting or both. That said, I wouldn't think it's impossible to get the colours right without using these plugins ... but it's going to be real tough. I cannot imagine why someone would want to try. I got fairly good (but not perfect) results using a demo version of SilverFast Ai—but that's very expensve and will work only for the scanner model you bought it for. I also got acceptable (but not very good) results using my scanner's scan software plus Photoshop (and no plugin) following the procedures outlined in an article on C F Systems' website here ... by the way, that website is full of articles worth reading for digital photographers (or rather, analog photographers using a scanner). But since I bought NegPos (which included the subsequent updates to ColorNeg and then ColorPerfect), my quest for The Right Method™ is over. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted March 1, 2011 Share #20 Posted March 1, 2011 ColorPerfect is a godsend in terms of getting the best results imo, but I sure wish the developer would get some help with standard interface implementation, not to mention finding someone who can write a straightforward manual. When you get the hang of the plug-in, it is a massive time-saver and (for me, at least) has given by far the best results with my negative scans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.