Scanning Workflow

[skimmel]

I realize this isn't a Leica-specific question, but hope it's OK to post here: I have shot film as a hobby for about 30 years and recently got into digital 2 years ago. As a result I learned PhotoShop and now feel comfortable doing basic stuff with it.

I've recently decided to go back to film (not instead of, but along with digital) and got an M. I'd like to work with my pictures in photoshop but am unsure of the best approach.

Here's the issue: my local lab can develop my film (I shoot negatives not slides) and do hi-resolution scans for me, but it's expensive. I'm thinking of getting a scanner and having the lab develop the negs. The question is: how time-consuming is it to just preview the negatives off the scanner? I would like to quickly pick those photos to scan "for real" and work on. My lab can also scan low-res which would give me a nice preview, but that still costs money. (Prints are even more expensive.) Any help would be appreciated as this is all new to me.

Also, I'd be interested to hear about how everyone gets their pics onto their computers. Does anyone have a local lab scan at high-res? low-res just to preview? or is it best just to do it all yourself?

Thanks.

 

[ent2b]

i scan various resolutions depending on how important the picture is and how much i want to do with it using a Nikon Coolscan V. I think in the mid-mid/upper range of dedicated film scanners, that and the Minolta 5400 II are the kings of the league. most of the pics that I have up through the weblink are scanned using the NCSV. I think a lot depends on how much you want to spend.

 

[skimmel]

Thanks ent2b. Do you develop your own film or have a lab do it? If the latter, do you just bring the negatives home and scan them all?

 

[GeneW]

Skimmel, I have my col negs developed only and not cut. Preview is very fast on most scanners. My normal workflow is to scan every frame at 1300dpi which scans quickly and is large enough for web use and 4x6 prints. I put my scan software on autonumbering so that I incorporate the frame number into the scanned file name. I then (using Photoshop) make a contact sheet of the scanned images. After working up a few of the images, I usually delete the 1300dpi scans -- I can reference my contact sheet later.

When I see something I really like and want to work with it in large size, I then re-scan that frame at highest resolution -- that takes much more time, so I reserve it for special jobs. I don't find I need to do this very often. The smaller scans work for most of my use.

Just one person's way of working with scans ...

Gene

 

[ent2b]

skimmel - unfortunately, i've never developed a roll in my life. i just admited to the world that i am a 31-yo [film development] virgin. 😱

i think gene has a good workflow going.

 

[bmattock]

I develop my own B&W. I cut the neg into strips of 6.

I have a one-hour shop develop my C41 stuff. I have the do process/cut/sleeve ONLY - no prints, no scan. Costs $2 per roll at Walgreens. Avoids scratches. They cut them into strips of 4. This wastes time scanning, since my scanner (Minolta Scan Dual IV) has a holder for 6 negs at a time, but I've tried having them NOT cut/sleeve, and the results were not acceptable - scratched, rolled up into a tight little ball, and I invariably scratch them more trying to cut them into 6 and get them to lay out flat.

Once I have my strips (6 or 4), I set up my scanner with Vuescan (I run Linux).

I create a new directory for those scans.

I set up a file-naming convention for that session (assuming they are all related in some way).

I scan an unexposed frame using Vuescan's instructions to get the base color locked (sometimes I just go with default 'generic color film' setting for both C41 and B&W, it works well more often than not).

At that point, I have to decide if I am going to scan everything, or pick and choose which frames I want.

If I decide to scan everything, I set my Vuescan to do batch scanning of frames 1-4 or 1-6 (depending on color or B&W). I then load up the first strip of negs, dust it, insert it, and let 'er rip. I do other things while it is going - it ejects when it is done and I repeat this step over and over until it's all done.

If I decide to scan only chosen negs - I do a 'preview' in Vuescan for each neg. This takes only a few seconds. After each one, if I decide to scan, I orient the frame as required, set the cropping marks, position the focus target, and fire off the scan. I don't have it eject the holder after each scan, I do that manually when I'm done with the strip.

Either way, scanning is time-consuming, but cost-effective for me. I can be doing lots of other things on my PC while this is going on. Works a treat, saves me a fortune. My scanner has easily paid for itself by now - just in the savings from not having prints/scans done at the high street shop.

And that, incidentally, is how you avoid getting scratches on your negs. Just have the one-hour place develop - not print or scan. That's what scratches them - and they charge you for it, too.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[skimmel]

Thanks Gene and Bill. That is incredibly helpful! What kind of scanner do you use?

I must admit, the time requirements for scanning are what is giving me pause. However, I really like working in a digital darkroom.

Any others with examples of how they do this?

Thanks.

 

[bmattock]

I use an older Epson Perfection PHOTO 2400 flat-bed scanner with the optional TPU (transparency adapter) for 4x5 and 6x9 120/220 roll film for my large format and medium format work.

I use a Konica-Minolta DiMage Scan Dual IV dedicated film scanner for my 35mm slide / B&W / C41 work.

I run Linux and an operating system, and I use Vuescan 8.X.X for scanning software. I use The Gimp 2.2 for my image processing software (sort of a cross between PS Elements and PS).

I should also mention a couple more things. I have found in the past year that my negs are getting totally out of control, as are my scans. Therefore, I am in the process of going to a dedicated filing system for my negs, and a naming convention for my digital scans of those negs. Otherwise, I can't find anything later on. Someone asked me recently about some resolution tests I did on a Paxette a year or so again - can't find the scans or the negs. Dang.

Also, when I scan, I scan at the highest resolution my scanner will support - and save as TIF files. These files are big - they average 22 to 28 megs each for my 35mm. A 4x5 scan at 2400 dpi can easily create a 700 or 800 meg file. I burn to DVD - CD-ROM is no longer an option. I file the DVD's with my negs, and I label them with an El Marko.

Hard drives are cheap - I currently have three 250 gig drives online. Will add more as needed, but I also can delete after backing up to DVD as required. Although I'll admit, I'd love to have a Terabyte of drive space online - just to say I had it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[GeneW]

I'm using a Minolta 5400. Unlike Bill, I don't keep big scans around -- just those few I scanned big and they get stored in Photoshop .psd format with layers intact. My main system is Win2000 and I've upgraded to Photoshop CS2. I could live with Linux and the Gimp, but would rather work with Photoshop -- an entirely personal preference.

Gene

p.s. A couple of years ago I wrote up a piece on establishing a naming convention for digital images. It's worked really well for me. Here's a link if interested:

http://www.northernjourney.com/photo/articles/filenaming.html

 

[bmattock]

Gene's files would be much larger than mine - I can understand the reticence to keep them online! I would love to use Photoshop - no doubt it is a more powerful tool than The Gimp. But Linux/The Gimp are free - that works for me. Also, as a color-blind person, there is a distinct limit to what I can even do in PS - most of the more complex actions are things I'd never even be able to see, let alone do. I tend to just use The Gimp to rotate, crop, auto-adjust colors and level, sometimes desaturate to B&W, resize, and USM. That's about it. Oh, and I have experimented with changing perspective to fix the leaning tower of building, with so-so results.

Everyone's going to have their own perspective here. If I were a professional, and needed to make professional money, I'd use PS - because there are a lot of tools out there for the PS person, there are classes and experts and so on. Every issue of Rangefinder magazine is chock-full of PS tips, etc. And of course, it would be expensive, but a business expense, and so a tax write-off here in the USA. I have nothing against PS - I'm just cheap!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[DaveSee]

I would love to use Photoshop - no doubt it is a more powerful tool than The Gimp. But Linux/The Gimp are free - that works for me...
I tend to just use The Gimp to rotate, crop, auto-adjust colors and level, sometimes desaturate to B&W, resize, and USM. That's about it.

Interesting, Bill, I too use Linux and was having a chat with another fella about the
"tools" in Linux vs. MacOSX/Windows just the other day. Glad to hear that Vuescan+
Konica/Minolta is working well for you, as I'm waiting on a Konica/Minolta scanner
to set up shop.

The Gimp is quite capable, I'll add, and has that nifty "Script Fu" plugin capability:
made import of RAW files from my Coolpix950 very easy, plus batch/non-interactive
processing too... like if you want to take 200 RAW or TIFF images and produce
50% JPEGS for a website. You might look into another Linux staple image utility
named ImageMagick: nice for the very things you do, but a much less cluttered
application.

Everyone's going to have their own perspective here. If I were a professional, and needed to make professional money, I'd use PS - because there are a lot of tools out there for the PS person, there are classes and experts and so on. Every issue of Rangefinder magazine is chock-full of PS tips, etc. And of course, it would be expensive, but a business expense, and so a tax write-off here in the USA. I have nothing against PS - I'm just cheap!

Your assessment is reasonably sound, however, some professionals--like the folks
at Blue Sky( "Ice Age," "Robots" ), ILM ( "Star Wars," etc.) and others of special
effects fame use Linux--and in house programmers--to develop their workflow,
and "look"... I can imagine a few folks here might very well find the flexibility
to create a personal image processing technique, which The Gimp's "Script-Fu"
provides access, a professional/business advantage.

Of course, most may "focus" more on making the image with their gear 😉

Thanks for posting your method... which Linux distro are you using?

rgds,
Dave

 

[brahm]

I use Heidelberg TANGO drum scanner to scan all my negs into LinoColor LAB format at minimum 4000 dpi. Then bring the Raw LAB file into Photoshop CS to convert to RGB for tweaking or converting into Black & White RGB. Then sharpening is done via PhotoKit Sharpener plug in for the various uses. The sharpness you get from a drum scanner definitely is in the different league compared to one from Nikon or Minolta film scanner.

Brahm

 

[skimmel]

Thanks to all for their input. I may go ahead and get a scanner (although not a Heidelberg!).

If others have examples they could share that would be great too.