vicmortelmans
Well-known
Hi,
I shot my first slide film (Sensia 200) and ran it through the scanner. Results were quite OK.
- exposure is satisfying on most shots, even in bright sunlight (lots of contrast); only a few have lost shadow detail, because of improper metering
- color reproduction is natural, but saturation is very high.
Here's an example:
http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/fts/2007/2007_varia/slides/200704_0081_pasen_23.html
As it's my first trial, I don't have any experience in postprocessing scanned slides. I was especially surprised by the color saturation; it's too high to please me. Certainly when comparing it to my negative scans, which tend to lack color saturation.
I've tried the Hue/Saturation-controls of my image editor and reducing the saturation seems to improve the images.
What post-processing do you typically apply when scanning slides?
Groeten,
Vic
I shot my first slide film (Sensia 200) and ran it through the scanner. Results were quite OK.
- exposure is satisfying on most shots, even in bright sunlight (lots of contrast); only a few have lost shadow detail, because of improper metering
- color reproduction is natural, but saturation is very high.
Here's an example:
http://users.pandora.be/vicmortelmans/fts/2007/2007_varia/slides/200704_0081_pasen_23.html
As it's my first trial, I don't have any experience in postprocessing scanned slides. I was especially surprised by the color saturation; it's too high to please me. Certainly when comparing it to my negative scans, which tend to lack color saturation.
I've tried the Hue/Saturation-controls of my image editor and reducing the saturation seems to improve the images.
What post-processing do you typically apply when scanning slides?
Groeten,
Vic
dmr
Registered Abuser
vicmortelmans said:
I've been using the K-M SD 4 for almost 2 years now, and I haven't noticed any generalized difference in saturation between negatives and slides. It seems to depend more on the film and the subject itself.
Kodachrome in particular retains that "Kodachrome look", and Velvia is a lot more punchy.
I do as little processing as possible in the scanner software and post-process in Photoshop. I haven't found a case yet where I've had to turn down the saturation.
dmr
Registered Abuser
This thread has an example of the same scene in Fuji 400 and Kodachrome, scanned on the same scanner. Very little, if any postprocessing, and I'm sure I didn't adjust the saturation on either.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9393
The two shots are about 3/4 of the way down on the page. The Fuji negative shot clearly shows more saturation.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9393
The two shots are about 3/4 of the way down on the page. The Fuji negative shot clearly shows more saturation.
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
I was about to give up on scanning my slides-
Way over saturated! Then I was clicking around in Vuescan and turned on the button that shows out of gamut pixles. I had almost a third sometimes of the image out of gamut!
Some google action later, I read about color spaces.. Now I have to turn the saturation up intead of down when I post process the scan file..
The default color space in Vuescan is Adobe RGB, which can't hang with the colors a slide can put out, so instead choose ProphotoRGB..
Google 'vuescan out of gamut' and see.
With a wider color space selected, the saturation appeared way less severe, also the out of gamut pixles were no longer flagged.
My scans looked alot like the one you linked before I chose the wider color space for the vuescan output.
Lucky I saved all the scans as 'raw' from vuescan so I just re'scan' the file, since I now have to re-do a couple hundred..
I don't know if you are using vuescan, but I'd think most serious scanner sofware will let you select the output color space for the files.
Way over saturated! Then I was clicking around in Vuescan and turned on the button that shows out of gamut pixles. I had almost a third sometimes of the image out of gamut!
Some google action later, I read about color spaces.. Now I have to turn the saturation up intead of down when I post process the scan file..
The default color space in Vuescan is Adobe RGB, which can't hang with the colors a slide can put out, so instead choose ProphotoRGB..
Google 'vuescan out of gamut' and see.
With a wider color space selected, the saturation appeared way less severe, also the out of gamut pixles were no longer flagged.
My scans looked alot like the one you linked before I chose the wider color space for the vuescan output.
Lucky I saved all the scans as 'raw' from vuescan so I just re'scan' the file, since I now have to re-do a couple hundred..
I don't know if you are using vuescan, but I'd think most serious scanner sofware will let you select the output color space for the files.
vicmortelmans
Well-known
clintock said:
Hi Clint,
yes I use Vuescan, and my second slide film is to be finished any day now, so I have a good feeling that I can improve it, given the similarity to your problem!
Groeten,
Vic
Tuolumne
Veteran
I looked at your link. I like the saturation! Can you show us a rescan that you like better? It would be interesting to compare.
/T
/T
vicmortelmans
Well-known
Hi,
I experimented with the output color space and here are some screenshots.
sRGB (default) is to my taste too saturated:
I also tried the ProPhoto, but see little difference compared to sRGB. It only seems to influence brightness of the image really:
The only setting which really desaturates the image is deviceRGB.
If you look at the raw image, it's looking very dull:
I'd have liked it somewhere inbetween the device RGB and the ProPhotoRGB, but my favour goes to the least saturated: deviceRGB...
If you can give any comments how this all makes sense, please do so!
Groeten,
Vic
I experimented with the output color space and here are some screenshots.
sRGB (default) is to my taste too saturated:
I also tried the ProPhoto, but see little difference compared to sRGB. It only seems to influence brightness of the image really:
The only setting which really desaturates the image is deviceRGB.
If you look at the raw image, it's looking very dull:
I'd have liked it somewhere inbetween the device RGB and the ProPhotoRGB, but my favour goes to the least saturated: deviceRGB...
If you can give any comments how this all makes sense, please do so!
Groeten,
Vic
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
I do like the deviceRGB in your example best; I don't remember if I even tried that one..
Out of gamut pixels was what I was trying to cure, where in my case the reds were blown out. I have the mac version of vuescan, but there should also be on your version a button that says 'Pixel Colors'. Turning that on will make out of gamut pixels appear highlighted.
Also note the monitor color space is selectable separately from the output color space- also altering the way the scanned image appears in the vuescan window.
I say go with the deviceRGB, since apparently it's the color space associated with your scanner... and it looks like it works.
The advice I got from google links in my quest was to use the color space that just barely can contain the gamut of the scans.. That is, a few out of gamut pixles are ok.. but not whole areas.
Edit-
I just tried DeviceRGB and i think it may indeed be better than ProphotoRGB.. gah, now to rescan the raws yet again..
Out of gamut pixels was what I was trying to cure, where in my case the reds were blown out. I have the mac version of vuescan, but there should also be on your version a button that says 'Pixel Colors'. Turning that on will make out of gamut pixels appear highlighted.
Also note the monitor color space is selectable separately from the output color space- also altering the way the scanned image appears in the vuescan window.
I say go with the deviceRGB, since apparently it's the color space associated with your scanner... and it looks like it works.
The advice I got from google links in my quest was to use the color space that just barely can contain the gamut of the scans.. That is, a few out of gamut pixles are ok.. but not whole areas.
Edit-
I just tried DeviceRGB and i think it may indeed be better than ProphotoRGB.. gah, now to rescan the raws yet again..
Last edited:
vicmortelmans
Well-known
Hi Clint,
You're still ahead of me... I just noticed that my initial setting caused the images to look differently in Vuescan compared to the saved image in another viewer. Then my eye fell on the monitor color space. If I now set both output and monitor colorspaces to the same setting, I 'see what I get' in Vuescan, which is quite important.
Also I notice that the deviceRGB is not an option in the monitor color space selector, and now I definitely like the setting best when both monitor and output colorspaces are set to ProPhotoRGB!
Final note: for my scans the deviceRGB is the setting that eliminates most out-of-gamut-pixels.
And my final conclusion is that slide film, certainly the Sensia 100 which I used for this last roll, is a medium I'll be using more often from now on!
Groeten,
Vic
You're still ahead of me... I just noticed that my initial setting caused the images to look differently in Vuescan compared to the saved image in another viewer. Then my eye fell on the monitor color space. If I now set both output and monitor colorspaces to the same setting, I 'see what I get' in Vuescan, which is quite important.
Also I notice that the deviceRGB is not an option in the monitor color space selector, and now I definitely like the setting best when both monitor and output colorspaces are set to ProPhotoRGB!
Final note: for my scans the deviceRGB is the setting that eliminates most out-of-gamut-pixels.
And my final conclusion is that slide film, certainly the Sensia 100 which I used for this last roll, is a medium I'll be using more often from now on!
Groeten,
Vic
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
I'm right there with you-
I was so frustrated with poor scans until my color space eye opener, that I went out and bought a slide projector (free) and screen (six dollars) just to feel good about the slides I had.
Was using the scanner for black and white only!
Now I may re-visit some negative color stuff, which up to now I was just getting done on CD at the minilab, since every fuji negative had out of gamut when I tried to scan..
Oh if you like sensia, seek Vchrome 100, marketed by voightlaender of all people.
I got a box of 50 for 50 dollars from..
http://www.photosuperia.com/voigtla...exposures-slide-film-bulk-pro-pack-p-310.html
I don't know for a fully tested fact that it is fuji superia, but it sure looks like it, the edge markings anyway. I bought some real superia (one roll for 9CH!) and will see how they compare.
I was so frustrated with poor scans until my color space eye opener, that I went out and bought a slide projector (free) and screen (six dollars) just to feel good about the slides I had.
Was using the scanner for black and white only!
Now I may re-visit some negative color stuff, which up to now I was just getting done on CD at the minilab, since every fuji negative had out of gamut when I tried to scan..
Oh if you like sensia, seek Vchrome 100, marketed by voightlaender of all people.
I got a box of 50 for 50 dollars from..
http://www.photosuperia.com/voigtla...exposures-slide-film-bulk-pro-pack-p-310.html
I don't know for a fully tested fact that it is fuji superia, but it sure looks like it, the edge markings anyway. I bought some real superia (one roll for 9CH!) and will see how they compare.
Last edited: