Top Tips for Vuescan & scanning in general

[remegius]

Thanks for the link. This is all very interesting. I have found that even though I save the file as a digital negative, and import it into the raw converter as a negative image, I'm still able to do some basic editing in the raw converter with the image reversed. Then I just open it PS and invert. I guess that amounts to the same thing, but I haven't read Matt Alofs yet.

Cheers...

 

[kipkeston]

Ok! I will definitely be playing with raw or dngs when I get home this evening. Sounds great. I've always liked matt's results on screen.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Important, but seldom understood, Vuescan parameters from a six year user

Important, but seldom understood, Vuescan parameters from a six year user

I've been using Vuescan for six years and read many discussions about how to use it. I've concluded few really understand how it works.

Vuescan is a very simple program that works with almost all USB controlled scanners. It's simplicity is what puts it ahead of almost all other scan drivers because it lets you control all the software manipulation.

Vuescan does two separate things:

1) it captures the shadow image falling on the sensor and converts that to an electronic file. Consider it to be similar to a RAW file captured on a digital camera sensor. The only control over what data is initially captured is the exposure. And that's not particularly sensitive. Again, there is no other control over the data initially captured.

2) The Vuescan software then takes this information captured by the sensor and manipulates it for output.

a) the Vuescan software sets the endpoints of the levels. You can do it better yourself in an image editor (Photoshop). So set both the high and low at -0-

b) the Vuescan software adjusts the contrast. You can do it better yourself in an image editor (Photoshop). So don't worry about it. Pick any film.

c) the Vuescan software make this data a positive or negative image. You can do it yourself in an image editor (Photoshop). So don't worry about it.

d) for B&W, the Vuescan software merges the R,G,&B channels to make a greyscale file if you want. If you think there is more data on one of the color channels even though they all came from the same monochrome (b&w) neg, work with it. Personally, I've never found a difference. I convert to greyscale in Vuescan rather than Photoshop just because it gives me smaller scan files.

e) the Vuescan software adjusts the color balance. You can do it better yourself in an image editor (Photoshop). This means you can pick any color film you want in Vuescan. You can set the Vuescan for Ektachrome and scan Kodacolor and it will capture the same data. You just have to invert and adjust it yourself.

Now you can ask why Vuescan has all these controls if we can do it better ourself. It's because we photographers are picky and use image editors. Most of the scan users just want a reasonably good file straight from the scanner. They use all those Vuescan controls to do the same thing we do in Photoshop.

I think too many people struggle to get the best looking scan possibly out of Vuescan. Then they readjust them in Photoshop. It's the same as some digital folks initial preference for a camera adjusted JPG because it looks better than an unadjusted RAW file.

All you want to do with the scanner software is capture the maximum data so you can later adjust it. Don't worry if the scans don't look great. That's what Photoshop is for. You can do it better.

Most other scanner software does the equivalent of a digital camera converting to JPG. It's OK but not what we demand. Vuescan lets you disable or at least control those adjustments.

So I suggest not getting overly complex with Vuescan. Make use of it's simplicity. Then make use of your image editor to do yourself what needs to be done to have a great looking final file

 

[remegius]

So I suggest not getting overly complex with Vuescan. Make use of it's simplicity. Then make use of your image editor to do yourself what needs to be done to have a great looking final file

Thanks, Bob. That makes perfect sense to me. So, is there then any good reason to output to raw rather than TIFF? It would seem not.

Cheers...

 

[kipkeston]

Thanks Bob much clearer I'd say This leaves me with a new issue. I've never really learned how to process properly in photoshop any raw file. That said, I'm sure there are many tutorials out there but if anyone has any advice on I'd gladly listen. I've just been fixing levels, inverting and sharpening.

 

[amateriat]

Thanks, Bob. That makes perfect sense to me. So, is there then any good reason to output to raw rather than TIFF? It would seem not.

Cheers...

None that I can think of. TIFF is great as a near-non-destructive file format to do a goodly amount of tweaking to. (It helps to work with Adjustment Layers in Photoshop, which, yes, do require a fair amount in computer resources, but which will pay off big-time later on). As many digital-capture folk deal with RAW files, I often take the straight TIFF scan and archive it as my Master file, then copy it and tweak from there to a Work file, which is what ususally gets printed from. But that's just my work methos; there are others, some of which are just as valid.

And, all those film-type settings in VueScan do serve a purpose. The world of film is wild and wooly (still), and having basic parameters for striking a decent scan from a given chip of film isn't a trifling thing. For a beginner, VS won't bite all that hard if one follows directions regarding film-type and such. The controls for deviating from a given preset are there, all but asking to be twiddled with. But you can't get to Great before learning what it means to be simply Good (and to ape those School of Visual Arts ads in the subway here, How Bad Do You Want To Be Good?). Get to grips with the basics, and the more-interesting stuff will be there when you're set to go excursive. I've been using VS over at least three generations of film scanners, and there's always a new wrinkle to discover in terms of making the most from a particular frame of film.

Doing the work is crucial. I couldn't give you everything you need to know, and I doubt anyone else here could, either. Make the scans, make the mistakes, take notes, ask questions. You'll get there.


- Barrett

 

[Bob Michaels]

I scan as a TIF which I always save untouched. Immediately after opening the TIF in Photoshop, I save as a .PSD file. That way I can always go back to the original scan file if needed.

And I do almost everything in separate layers in Photoshop and always save the unflatened file just in case I want to later go back and tweak.

That means everytime I print, I have to flatten, resize and sharpen the file but that takes only seconds.

I usually also save every file as a small (900 pixel wide) JPG just because they are so tiny and quick to do. That makes it quick when browsing files to find a particular one.

So everything I use is saved as the original scan TIF, the unflattened .PSD file, and a small JPG. But I only work on and save a very small percentage of my negs so HD space is not too much of an issue.

Of course I'm not contending that my workflow is the only way to do it. Everyone should do what works for them. But that's what works for me.

 

[infrequent]

all of these different versions, formats, is the simple reason why i stick to aperture. all the tweaks are just applied when you export the file. you can have multiple versions, multiple copies, but the master can never be accidentally damaged. i just don't give a damn about organising and managing files. that's what computers and software are for.

 

[kipkeston]

Well. I think I've got everything under control now. I believe I've surpassed nikonscan by using vuescan raw/dng and PS. Previously I was using nikonscan and importing to lightroom, but I think PS is the real deal and seems to be the ultimate solution. My only concern is organization, but I'm considering importing edited PSDs into LR to keep things organized.

Here's a test photo for editing purposes
vuescan raw+PS

nikonscan+lightroom