The poll answer options are a bit too simplistic for me.
I've been scanning negatives using all sorts of different methodologies, as the technology has evolved over the years, since 1984. In the first 5 years of that time, it was work that I did for NASA/JPL as part of my job using machinery that was frighteningly expensive and complex, and for basically science/forensic data gathering. I started applying effort to scanning film for my photography/art uses about 1994, first with scanning setup I constructed myself out of a flatbed scanner, and later with a dedicated negative scanner. Over the 25 years since, I've now moved to doing all my scanning/digitization work via a copy camera approach.
I'm of the camp that says "scanning should retrieve as much data from the original as possible to allow for best rendering flexibility and range." In other words, I don't try to produce finished work when scanning, I try to capture the entire dynamic range and detail available in the original and leave the finish rendering work to post-scan processing. This does mean that I adjust the capture exposure to suit the negative on a per negative basis to keep saturation of highlights in range and put some effort to getting the black point within reach of correct, but I don't spend a lot of effort to adjust color temperature or other curves at the time of scanning. I capture all negatives in a session at the same, fixed color temperature so that I can apply basic white balance corrections to all in one motion, later tuning the white balances and tonal curves on a per exposure basis. Sometimes no further adjustment is required after scanning, but that's rare. Most of the time, an optimized rendering takes a bit more adjustment.
You are welcome to drop that into either of the poll answer categories you provided, as you like. 🙂
G
