How do you scan color?

brbo said:
It's clear that one is scanned as slide film (Plustek) and the other (V700) as negative.
Click to expand...

I'll go back and rescan with the V700 set on Slide and on colour neg. I hope you're onto something (although I believe the Plustek was set on colour neg).
Pete
 
I always scan as Colour neg as far as I'm aware:

Just for the sake of it:
V700 Slide raw
slide raw.jpg

V700 Colour neg raw:
colour neg raw.jpg

V700 Slide raw:

slide.jpg
 
V700 Colour neg raw:
colour neg.jpg


Both still show the magenta reds, and look pretty similar to each other.
Any other ideas?

Pete
 
Pete B said:
Yes it was. Should it be scanned as a slide for a linear RAW file?
Pete
Click to expand...

No. Scan negative film as negative film. Most scanners (Plustek 120 is the first I've heard to be an exception) will extend the green and blue channel exposure to counter the orange mask in color negative film. This will not totally eliminate orange mask (and could even introduce a slight blue or green mask), but it will be better than nothing at all.

Do it like this unless you have a scanner that lets user set individual gains on each channel. In this case scan negative film as slide film and adjust individual channels to totally cancel out orange mask. Vuescan will try to be wiser than you if you scan negative as negative and try to adjust individual gains to totally compensate for orange mask.

Btw, the problem you think you have with the slight difference in some hues in inverted pictures between two different scanners... Try sending the same negative to two different labs that operate on different systems (lets say Fuji Frontier and Agfa d.lab). The difference in those two scans (compared to a tiny difference between V700 and Plustek 120) will seem like a bad joke.
 
brbo said:
No. Scan negative film as negative film. Most scanners (Plustek 120 is the first I've heard to be an exception) will extend the green and blue channel exposure to counter the orange mask in color negative film. This will not totally eliminate orange mask (and could even introduce a slight blue or green mask), but it will be better than nothing at all.

Do it like this unless, you have a scanner that lets user set individual gains on each channel. In this case scan negative film as slide film and adjust individual channels to totally cancel out orange mask. Vuescan will try to be wiser than you if you scan negative as negative and try to adjust individual gains to totally compensate for orange mask.

Btw, the problem you think you have with the slight difference in some hues in inverted pictures between two different scanners... Try sending the same negative to two different labs that operate on different systems (lets say Fuji Frontier and Agfa d.lab). The difference in those two scans (compared to a tiny difference between V700 and Plustek 120) will seem like a bad joke.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this; the differences here between the V700 and Plustek (in terms of colour) aren't huge.

The real question is: is this what Portra 160 is supposed to look like???

;)
 
TXForester said:
When I said standard, I was referring to how a negative film with specific development and printing on a specific paper would look. Ektar and Portra developed in the same chemicals, with recommended temps and times and printed on the same paper would have different looks. This is designed by the manufacturer, so the user can achieve different looks (and the manufacturer can sell more film).

If I went to different labs with rolls of Ektar and Portra and the shots are the same subject with the same light, I'd expect my Portra to prints to look similar (allowing for some tolerance) from all the labs and the same goes for my Ektar. That is the standard or bull's eye for the labs to aim at. Assuming here the labs use the same machines, chemistry and paper. However I would not expect my Ektar prints to look like my Portra, otherwise I'd only need one film.
Click to expand...

I think you're confusing different issues here; the LAD aims that allow each machine to be calibrated or even characterised against a measured existing standard (Munsell) used for printer characterisation; and the individual films dye set or what is correctly termed 'capture dyes' that are used to profile films.
One is used to characterise and then calibrate hardware to a known standard (Munsell) the other the create a profile (channel) for each individual film which confusingly reference and use the same Munsell standard.
Basically when you design a film you know what the output space will be because you also made the paper and use the same standards that reference the same value; so you can predict what the film will do before you send it to production and the flush testers.

Does that explain or have I misunderstood?
 
Photo Smith, what's the trick to getting red reds from a V700 as in your sample? Pretty please! Or is the trick buying a Plustek 120 for medium Format?
Pete
 
edge100 said:
Negative, linear Raw (TIFF format). Did you watch my video?
Click to expand...

Yes, and here's a thread I wrote when I was first getting to grips with Vuescan and Colourperfect back in August 2010, and another thread about CP in March 2011. One video with a better scanner and a file with no reds does not an expert make.
But I do thank you for your help and time.
I'd like to point out that I've since learnt how to spell "shadow" ;)
Pete
 
edge100 said:
The real question is: is this what Portra 160 is supposed to look like???
Click to expand...

AFAIK Kodak never said that (how it's supposed to look like) for Ektar 100 and every negative film released after that. At least not beyond descriptive terms like ultra-vivid, natural-skin-tones etc... But I would love to be proven wrong. Photo_Smith?
 
brbo said:
AFAIK Kodak never said that (how it's supposed to look like) for Ektar 100 and every negative film released after that. At least not beyond descriptive terms like ultra-vivid, natural-skin-tones etc... But I would love to be proven wrong. Photo_Smith?
Click to expand...

You're not wrong at all.
 
Pete B said:
Yes, and here's a thread I wrote when I was first getting to grips with Vuescan and Colourperfect back in August 2010, and another thread about CP in March 2011. One video with a better scanner and a file with no reds does not an expert make.
But I do thank you for your help and time.
I'd like to point out that I've since learnt how to spell "shadow" ;)
Pete
Click to expand...

Quite right. Quite right.

Figure it out yourself.
 
Pete B said:
I believe they're both scanned with the same Vuescan settings:
Plustek
View attachment 98795
V700
View attachment 98796

And this shows the problem I have. Whereas the Plustek scan gives normal reds, the V700 scans give magenta reds.
Click to expand...

Are you sure that the two colour spaces match, it looks to me as if the V700 has a smaller colour gamut than the plustek saturating the reds. I could be wrong as I don't have the two gamut to check against each other.

comparing the two profiles I have for the V500 (film) and the V700 seem to suggest they match reasonably closely but behave slightly differently to certain colours.
154514975.jpg

I'm guessing the Plustek has a slightly wider gamut.
 
Pete B said:
Portra 160
Click to expand...

It's not expired by any chance? It just doesn't quite look like the results I get from Portra 160. To muted, dated looking.

Are you developing yourself or at a lab? Is it a lab that maintains their machines well, you would be surprised!

It will be tricky to get a good result if the source negative is even a bit off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom