Scanning hell (p me)!

[kanzlr]

The scanner should not make a difference in the workflow. What is the problem?

Setup Vuescan like the Colorperfect homepage says you should (48bit color, safe as RAW in Tif format) then open the Tif in Photoshop, Open the Plugin from the Plugin Menu and chose the appropriate film type.

 

[kanzlr]

If you have a hard time setting up Vuescan, I can send you my configuration that you can load.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Jamie it would help if you posted a shot you're having trouble with. I use Silverfast and Vuescan possibly we can help if we can see what the problem is.

I normally make flat scans and work in PSCS as long as you get the info from the scanner by setting black point and white point get a nice fat information holding flat looking scan it should be relatively easy.

 

[wilonstott]

Hey guys--I'm taking great interest in this thread. I've been able to get a linear scan with my V700 as per the directions on the site, and I'm demoing ColorPerfect. However, I can't get the plugin to work with my current setup.

I'm using a mac that's running 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) and I'm trying to run the plugin through Photoshop Elements Version 6. It tells me the plugin is not available.

What gives?

 

[cabbiinc]

Hey guys--I'm taking great interest in this thread. I've been able to get a linear scan with my V700 as per the directions on the site, and I'm demoing ColorPerfect. However, I can't get the plugin to work with my current setup.

I'm using a mac that's running 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) and I'm trying to run the plugin through Photoshop Elements Version 6. It tells me the plugin is not available.

What gives?

You should start a new thread. Conversations like this, while related, get diluted over time with too many people responding to different things.

That said the CF website says this about the Mac version of ColorPerfect:

The Macintosh version of ColorPerfect requires OS X to work and has been tested with Photoshop 7 through CS4 on the PowerPC platform and with Photoshop CS3 through CS5 running native on the Intel platform. There currently is not a 64-bit Mac version available. Once you have ColorPerfect working, you may want to use larger dialogs with larger preview images to better accommodate larger displays. See
http://www.c-f-systems.com/Plug-ins.html#DialogSize
​

Can you work on tiffs in 16 bit mode with Elements 6? If not then you won't get it to work. If Elements 6 doesn't have the Adobe plug-in architecture required you won't get it to ever register either, so don't try to buy it until you can verify that it will work with what you have. You may look into alternatives. It's possible an earlier version of ColorPerfect may work better.

 

[edge100]

You should start a new thread. Conversations like this, while related, get diluted over time with too many people responding to different things.

That said the CF website says this about the Mac version of ColorPerfect:

The Macintosh version of ColorPerfect requires OS X to work and has been tested with Photoshop 7 through CS4 on the PowerPC platform and with Photoshop CS3 through CS5 running native on the Intel platform. There currently is not a 64-bit Mac version available. Once you have ColorPerfect working, you may want to use larger dialogs with larger preview images to better accommodate larger displays. See
http://www.c-f-systems.com/Plug-ins.html#DialogSize
​

Can you work on tiffs in 16 bit mode with Elements 6? If not then you won't get it to work. If Elements 6 doesn't have the Adobe plug-in architecture required you won't get it to ever register either, so don't try to buy it until you can verify that it will work with what you have. You may look into alternatives. It's possible an earlier version of ColorPerfect may work better.

Yes, new thread required.

Just one correction, though: there IS a 64-bit Mac version now.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

If you have a hard time setting up Vuescan, I can send you my configuration that you can load.

that would be lovely!

 

[Photo_Smith]

Jamie can you post an image of what your scan 'hell' looks like? What type of material are you scanning?

I'm sure it can be easily sorted out.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

standard scan, no alteration

clicked on automatic adjustment

scan from same type of film, same light conditions, same camera, but scanned by photolab.

 

[Photo_Smith]

I can't see a 'hell' there your pictures are fine. The one from the photolab looks cyan/green (very slight) on this laptop (profiled Monday with colormunki)

I think you're probably setting yourself too higher bar Jamie.

I presume you're running a full CMM that is profiling your screen etc?
I notice from your screen shot there is 'no vendor' and "filmtype other' in the Silverfast software—possibly a film profile will help there.
If you need accurate you need profiles.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

you really think the skin color of my scans are ok??

 

[Photo_Smith]

Well perfect skin tones are hard seeing as I am viewing on a laptop a few hundred miles away the margins for error between our systems let alone our colour vision—I'd say yes.

The skin tones from the lab shot looked cooler, I liked the top one but I like warm images.
The lab printed shot may be on the same film but looks to be under very different lighting.
The both look to be electronic flash, the top one being more diffused the close up is more directional.
Why don't you try scanning the Lab neg and seeing if you can do better?
In the end its not what I like or what my scan settings, software or workflow create—you should try to find your own way to create images that have the colour you like.
Yes–I do like your work, and see nothing wrong with the skin tones (caveat on my screen)
Regards
Mark Antony

 

[jaimiepeeters]

I appreciate your reply Photo Smith.
All pictures were taken with a Contax G2 with TLA 200 flash, same setting.
The Portra 160 is a very neutral color rendering film, my scans are way off darkish red.
Even pictures of the same distance between the subject and I show completely different colors.

I do want to scan the negatives that the lab scanned, unfortunately they are still at the lab.

 

[Photo_Smith]

I understand. Although they are taken with the same flash and equipment the shots are not comparable because of the difference in environment and distance. That said different colours are simple to fix, either your negafix profiles in silverfast are slightly wrong or absent or you just need to pull the into PSCS for a few seconds to balance.

You don't seem to have any real problems that can't be cured with a small colour adjustment, are you using colour management?

Because if not we may be shooting a moving target.

Hope you don't mind I did a 5 sec colour balance on the first shot you posted:

Is that the skin tone you like?

 

[jaimiepeeters]

Thanks for your time and effort, but your edit is where mine was going as well. It's all blueish, weird contrast, it doesn't look like a real natural image anymore, keep in mind it's shot with Portra 160. This looks like a Lomography way off color image. I couldn't get it to the neutral color either myself.. and the labscan is unaltered, that's how the film scans normally.

Any scanner should only have a little casting that is easy to remove.. not like my scans. Although I don't know if it's the software or the scanner.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Jamie
I think your problems lie with colour management, not with scanning and should be in a profiled workflow a simple fix.
I ask again are you fully profiled workflow or are we nailing jelly to a wall? I can tell you as a lab owner your labscan is not the be all and end all and is a little green/cyan for my taste–I hope my portra doesn't look like that!
The image I posted doesn't seem blue or weird if anything the skin is a little yellow.
Are you sure your monitor profile is OK?
Does this look strange to you?

Elsa by Photo Utopia, on Flickr

You see I'm unconvinced that your problem is wholly with the scan as you seem to be reluctant to give me enough info to help you.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

I calibrated my iMac with Eye Display One.. apparently it was the only really well working calibrator for an iMac.

But even if my screen were off colorprofilewise.. I still have several examples and references from other photographers.

The contrast in my scans is immens, while it's a Portra 160.. your scan doesn't have the same high contrast. It's neutral, while mine is not. The floor on my scan is blueish while its a green grey floor.

 

[jaimiepeeters]

Tried different settings as you can see in the images.
The only one close to neutral is this first image but still in the corners the colors change. If I have to colorcorrect this in PS, I would only have to adjust the corners... which is weird, because a scan should be neutral and not colored in the corners.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Jamie it looks like a negafix profile issue, I see you have an Ektar profile and that's a different dye set from Portra, have you got the Portra profile?
I think your scans look pretty straight magenta red in the main the last two are magenta-blue.
If I'm not so sure we still don't have a profile issue, are these tagged with Pro Photo? That won't help with non aware browsers

The second scan seems like the mid tones are out. The first is flat and slightly dull and would be my start point.
I set your floor to be grey in the image I tried to edit, if it is green then it might explain the magenta skin– years ago in lab printers it would be known as CF3 (colour failure 3)
Or pink bunny setting where a white rabbit would come out pink if it sat on green grass.

Better negafix profiles, scan flat and correct in PSCS you will be fine you're 90% there...

 

[jaimiepeeters]

I used the Kodak Ektar Negafix profile (as you can see in the left)

Will a plug in like Colorperfect get rid of color change in the corners too, you think?

I grabbed the greenish scans from the lab, opened them in PS and did color correction that took me 1 sec to make it nice and warm. I have never ever gotten a clean result, not even after hours of PS, from my scanner.