Help inverting scans in Lightroom or Photoshop

[jljohn]

For starters, I am scanning Tri-X (which I develop myself) on a Nikon Super Coolscan 900ED with Vuescan, and I do most of my processing in Lightroom 3 and/or SilverEfex. For a long time I was scanning in Vuescan as a "Black & White Negative" with a "16 bit grey" output. My color was designated as T-Max 400 with whatever CL (.50, .55, or .70) that looked best. I was not satisfied with the scan for a number of reasons. Chris Crawford and others recommended scanning as a slide, so I did some experimenting today. I tried B&W neg., Color neg., and Slide, and Wow--what a difference scanning as a slide makes. I get a much larger dynamic range, fewer artifacts, and a much better looking image that is easier to manipulate.

The problem is that the only way I could figure out how to invert the image is by inverting the tone curves in Lightroom, which has the unfortunate effect of making all my sliders operate in reverse, and I have to do it one image at a time. I have photoshop, but my PS skills are very limited. Can anyone help me learn how to invert a batch of scans from looking like a negative to a positive either in LR or PS. Anyone have an action for such a thing? How can I best do this? Thanks so much!

 

[venchka]

Somewhere in the PHOTOSHOP Image drop down menu or submenu there is a button to Invert. Not sure if you can do this in batch mode. From there I would save as 16 bit greyscale & flatten the layers. Saves disk space. Runs faster.
Are you sure there is a noticeable difference? Maybe you weren't getting all you could get with the B&W scans? I'm up for giving it a try. I'm hesitant since my current B&W scanning requires little or no adjustments in Lightroom 3.3.

PS: Several large format users SWEAR that the best possible scan comes from the green channel of a color negative scan. If you are a devout 200% pixel peeper with lots of OCD tendencies. Grinning.

Personally, I'm content with EpsonScan and 16 bit greyscale.

 

[bensyverson]

Photoshop: Command I

 

[Tim Gray]

You can get perfectly workable B&W scans of your negs with that scanner and Vuescan without scanning as a slide. Of course, you can do it that way if you want. But you'll have to invert it.

If you are going to scan as a B&W negative, make sure you set your white and black clipping points in Vuescan to 0%. Otherwise you will get clipping. I'd also recommend either sticking with generic color negative or Tmax 0.55 CI as your film type.

If you want to scan as a slide, you need to invert somewhere else. Lightroom really isn't set up for this as you've found out. Two options:
1. Do everything in Photoshop, including inverting.
2. Make a Photoshop droplet that just inverts your files then resaves them. Take the resulting files and run them through Lightroom.

For #2, you could always use Image Magick if you prefer the command line.

PS: I get sharpest B&W scans from the blue channel 🙂 It was very obvious at 100% - no OCD involved. And since Vuescan lets you 'make gray' from a given channel very easily with grayscale scans, it doesn't take much extra effort. On the other hand, stuff you see at 100% usually doesn't have a big impact...

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Photoshop: Command I

Command I on Mac, Ctrl I on Windows. The inverted image will be flat looking, you'll need to then do some curves adjustments to increase contrast quite a bit.

 

[_larky]

So you want a batch that simply runs and invert on a folder of images, or do you want to use a specific channel? Are you using a Mac or PC? The reason I ask is that if it's a Mac, and I have time, I could make a dandy little icon that would do it to any file dragged on it.

But yes, as already posted, Command + i runs the invert, but then you'll want to do extra fiddling with it before taking it back to Lightroom.

I wonder if I could make a Lightroom preset? I shall look.

 

[venchka]

... you'll need to then do some curves adjustments to increase contrast quite a bit.

Or not. As your negatives, scanning techniques, monitor, printer, paper & personal taste dictate.

 

[jljohn]

Thanks everyone! Yeah, there is a difference. For example--I was scanning an image of a bride with jet black hair today. The negatives had shadow detail in her hair everywhere except in the deepest fold, where no detail was recorded. When I scanned as a B&W neg, I got ugly black spotchy things in that area (black clipping I guess) of the scan. When I scanned as a slide and inverted (using the tone curves) the tonal transition was nice and smooth with absolutely no splotches or clipping. At 100% the area without any shadow detail was a nice looking field of almost black Tri-X grain (if that makes any sense). Now maybe, if I move the black and white clipping points to 0 and re-scan as a B&W neg, the scan will have a similar look. I'll give that a try too.

 

[venchka]

...

PS: I get sharpest B&W scans from the blue channel 🙂 It was very obvious at 100% - no OCD involved. And since Vuescan lets you 'make gray' from a given channel very easily with grayscale scans, it doesn't take much extra effort. On the other hand, stuff you see at 100% usually doesn't have a big impact...

Interesting. That is probably the first vote I've read for the blue channel. My scanner is so old, it just doesn't matter. 😀 😎

 

[jljohn]

if it's a Mac, and I have time, I could make a dandy little icon that would do it to any file dragged on it.

OOOH, now that sound awesome!!! I am using a Mac. Basically, I have been scanning to a folder, importing into lightroom, and making adjustments. An icon that I could drag files over would be nice and easy--or a lightroom preset. I am still getting the workflow down, and as you can see it needs some work, so these suggestions are all helpful.

 

[Tim Gray]

Interesting. That is probably the first vote I've read for the blue channel. My scanner is so old, it just doesn't matter. 😀 😎

I would imagine each scanner is different. Just scan a frame in RGB and look at each channel in Photoshop. It was pretty obvious in my case.

 

[venchka]

Thanks everyone! Yeah, there is a difference. For example--I was scanning an image of a bride with jet black hair today. The negatives had shadow detail in her hair everywhere except in the deepest fold, where no detail was recorded. When I scanned as a B&W neg, I got ugly black spotchy things in that area (black clipping I guess) of the scan. When I scanned as a slide and inverted (using the tone curves) the tonal transition was nice and smooth with absolutely no splotches or clipping. At 100% the area without any shadow detail was a nice looking field of almost black Tri-X grain (if that makes any sense). Now maybe, if I move the black and white clipping points to 0 and re-scan as a B&W neg, the scan will have a similar look. I'll give that a try too.

Sounds like you could benefit from Ken Lee's Scanning 101 Tutorial. Different software. The principles are the same. Output from 0 to 255. Set black point & white point on the histogram. Adjust Gamma to suit your eyeballs. Save as 16 bit TIFF file. Piece of cake.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

PS: I get sharpest B&W scans from the blue channel 🙂 It was very obvious at 100% - no OCD involved. And since Vuescan lets you 'make gray' from a given channel very easily with grayscale scans, it doesn't take much extra effort. On the other hand, stuff you see at 100% usually doesn't have a big impact...

Very interesting. What scanner are you using? And what B&W film are you scanning that gives you this result? At this point I'd speculate that scanning a Kodak BN (with its orange mask), XP2 (with its dye) vs. all other "silver" negatives would react differently.

Although, I'd rather use ICE if I can with C-41 and E-6.

 

[venchka]

It's been almost a week. Any luck? Progress?

 

[Tim Gray]

Very interesting. What scanner are you using? And what B&W film are you scanning that gives you this result? At this point I'd speculate that scanning a Kodak BN (with its orange mask), XP2 (with its dye) vs. all other "silver" negatives would react differently.

Silver negatives. I think it was Plus-X or Tri-X. I confirmed it with another scan of a different film at a later time. The difference was very clear. This was on a Nikon Coolscan V.

 

[jljohn]

Sounds like you could benefit from Ken Lee's Scanning 101 Tutorial. Different software. The principles are the same. Output from 0 to 255. Set black point & white point on the histogram. Adjust Gamma to suit your eyeballs. Save as 16 bit TIFF file. Piece of cake.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php

Thanks for this. I know the principles are the same, but Vuescan does not seem to offer a histogram. The one adjustment it seems to have that might be related is the curve high (options are .001 to .999) and curve low (same options). I tried a variety of different curve settings while scanning as a b&w negative, and the slide option still gave smoother transitions. If anyone knows exactly how to make the histogram black and white point or black and white clipping adjustments in Vuescan, I would appreciate knowing, because all the scanning tutorials just tell you to make the adjustments and it is not obvious in Vuescan. I like the price of the program, but I find it less than intuitive.

Regarding the inversions, this thread has helped a lot. I figured out how to save the command+I as an action and apply it to a batch, so that was very helpful.

 

[Tim Gray]

Vuescan has those adjustments but the feedback and range is pretty poor. I'd avoid doing it there. Just do it in Photoshop if you have it.

But, if you must, its the black and white %. You can also view the histogram by going to the 'view' menu and selecting the various graph options.