nightfly
Well-known
I'm wondering if people are using any of the newer tools like Adobe's Lightroom or Aperture in their scanning workflow. I know these two tools are optimized for RAW files but they seem to offer a lot of functionality that might be useful for scans as well (although no TWAIN drivers that I'm aware of).
Right now I basically scan using Epson Scan (never been disappointed enough to try and figure out Silverfast which also came with my 4990 Photo) through the Photoshop TWAIN driver, then I crop and get rid of any dust, then I create adjustment layers for Levels and Curves in Photoshop and tweak (if it is a color scan I also use Color Balance and Hue/Saturation layers) then I save as a PSD. This is the source file. Then I collapse the layers, reduce to a print dpi and save as a TIF, this is my "negative" to sharpen and print from) and then if it's going to the web I re-size and save for web. So I end up with a folder for each roll with three subfolders psds, tifs, jpgs.
Just wondering if Aperture or Lightroom might offer any advantages here.
Right now I basically scan using Epson Scan (never been disappointed enough to try and figure out Silverfast which also came with my 4990 Photo) through the Photoshop TWAIN driver, then I crop and get rid of any dust, then I create adjustment layers for Levels and Curves in Photoshop and tweak (if it is a color scan I also use Color Balance and Hue/Saturation layers) then I save as a PSD. This is the source file. Then I collapse the layers, reduce to a print dpi and save as a TIF, this is my "negative" to sharpen and print from) and then if it's going to the web I re-size and save for web. So I end up with a folder for each roll with three subfolders psds, tifs, jpgs.
Just wondering if Aperture or Lightroom might offer any advantages here.
smileyguy
Established
I tried both demos of Aperture and Lightroom and I didn't really find any advantage over my similar workflow to yours. My organizing is done in iPhoto and that serves my purposes quite well. It may be mostly because I'm sticking with what I'm used to but I find doing all the scanning in PS and then organizing in iPhoto more practical. I'm quite comfortable with PS so migrating to how Aperture did stuff was not any better for me.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I don't yet have a scanner but I do have Aperture, so take this with a grain of salt. I think scanned negs would go nicely in Aperture (along with digital photos), using it as more of an organizational tool (keywording, etc.), but I can't imagine sending scans into Aperture without giving them a good going over in PS first.
On the other hand, Aperture really has cut down the time I spend in PS to pretty much zero on the digital photos. All I was really doing in PS was using Camera Raw and converting for output, but then I was managing photos with iView. Aperture does all of this pretty well with some added features (managing more than one crop/size, etc.).
If you don't shoot RAW on a digital camera, I would think that Aperture (or lightroom) wouldn't be a good fit.
On the other hand, Aperture really has cut down the time I spend in PS to pretty much zero on the digital photos. All I was really doing in PS was using Camera Raw and converting for output, but then I was managing photos with iView. Aperture does all of this pretty well with some added features (managing more than one crop/size, etc.).
If you don't shoot RAW on a digital camera, I would think that Aperture (or lightroom) wouldn't be a good fit.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
I just use silverfast automode to scan to TIF, digital ice, etc... maybe some level adjustment but not curves. Then I use photoshop to clean the files and other thing. One problem I have is that I never be able to duplicate the same setting when scan.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
since both aperture and lightroom use on the fly processing - they can be taxed pretty heavily with very large files. They did well in my testing for dSLR images, but once I started getting my 100-800mb medium and large format scans into the mix, I was less happy with them. Very slow.
I'm hoping that will change as things go intel-mac native - I have not tested new versions.
For now, I personally stick to bridge and Extensis Portfolio for organizing, and Photoshop for image work.
I'm hoping that will change as things go intel-mac native - I have not tested new versions.
For now, I personally stick to bridge and Extensis Portfolio for organizing, and Photoshop for image work.
willie_901
Veteran
My Workflow
o B&W
1/ Develop/Dry/Cut
2/ Scan with Cannon 9950F using CanoScan driver: 1200 ppi, 48 bit color, auto frame and tone selection, .tif format
3/ Import scans into LightRoom; each film roll becomes a LightRoom "Shoot"
4/ In LightRoom, convert to monochrome, and make quick contrast/levels adjustments
5/ Manually scan "keeper" frames using SilverFast AI driver: 4800 or 2400 ppi, 48 bit ,HDR color; no auto settings; adjust exposure as needed, .tif format
6/ Import hi-res scans into LightRoom "Shoot" and convert to monochrome
7/ store negatives in a bound notebook
8/ Edit in LightRoom: adjust contrast, etc. as needed, crop, add keywords, add ratings, sort into my LightRoom "Collections"
9/ As needed, repair spots or other blemishes in PS (this is done using the Edit function in LightRoom's Photo Menu)
10/ Export from LightRoom for FLICKR photostream
o Color
1/ Lab develops film, cuts negatives and scans to CD as 2940 x 1960, 400 ppi, RGB colorspace jpegs (cost - $7.88 incl. taxes)
2/ follow steps 2 - 10 in B&W flow without monochrome conversion; also manual hi-res scans must be inverted using PS
3/ store CD
o Back Up files weekly on external HD
o Printing
Before printing, the image file may be recropped and more carefully adjusted using LightRoom. Then I send all printing to my lab as 500 ppi jpegs. I either take a CD to the lab or I upload jpeg file to their web site.
I am looking into local alternate printing options for electronic files that can provide higher quality prints and paper.
I am fortunate to have a great Lab nearby. I spend very little time scanning color film. My initial B&W scanning is highly automated and takes about 30-50 minutes (unattended). Rescanning the keeper frames does take more screen time. I usually scan and edit in parallel which improves efficiency.
I use LightRoom because it is much faster than Aperture when dealing with large files. Also LightRoom's integration with PS is a real plus. For instance, neither Aperture nor LightRoom have image inversion tools. But LightRoom lets you do this with PS. While I only used Aperture for a short time, it seemed to me LightRoom's image adjustment tools were superior.
willie
o B&W
1/ Develop/Dry/Cut
2/ Scan with Cannon 9950F using CanoScan driver: 1200 ppi, 48 bit color, auto frame and tone selection, .tif format
3/ Import scans into LightRoom; each film roll becomes a LightRoom "Shoot"
4/ In LightRoom, convert to monochrome, and make quick contrast/levels adjustments
5/ Manually scan "keeper" frames using SilverFast AI driver: 4800 or 2400 ppi, 48 bit ,HDR color; no auto settings; adjust exposure as needed, .tif format
6/ Import hi-res scans into LightRoom "Shoot" and convert to monochrome
7/ store negatives in a bound notebook
8/ Edit in LightRoom: adjust contrast, etc. as needed, crop, add keywords, add ratings, sort into my LightRoom "Collections"
9/ As needed, repair spots or other blemishes in PS (this is done using the Edit function in LightRoom's Photo Menu)
10/ Export from LightRoom for FLICKR photostream
o Color
1/ Lab develops film, cuts negatives and scans to CD as 2940 x 1960, 400 ppi, RGB colorspace jpegs (cost - $7.88 incl. taxes)
2/ follow steps 2 - 10 in B&W flow without monochrome conversion; also manual hi-res scans must be inverted using PS
3/ store CD
o Back Up files weekly on external HD
o Printing
Before printing, the image file may be recropped and more carefully adjusted using LightRoom. Then I send all printing to my lab as 500 ppi jpegs. I either take a CD to the lab or I upload jpeg file to their web site.
I am looking into local alternate printing options for electronic files that can provide higher quality prints and paper.
I am fortunate to have a great Lab nearby. I spend very little time scanning color film. My initial B&W scanning is highly automated and takes about 30-50 minutes (unattended). Rescanning the keeper frames does take more screen time. I usually scan and edit in parallel which improves efficiency.
I use LightRoom because it is much faster than Aperture when dealing with large files. Also LightRoom's integration with PS is a real plus. For instance, neither Aperture nor LightRoom have image inversion tools. But LightRoom lets you do this with PS. While I only used Aperture for a short time, it seemed to me LightRoom's image adjustment tools were superior.
willie
MikeL
Go Fish
Here's mine, and likely in need of improvement:
1. Develop, Dry, Cut
2. Scan into folder
3. Open files while scanning is going on in Photoshop. Decide on keepers.
4. Crop film holder edges out.
5. Use Spot healing brush for dust(I'm naming my first born after whoever developed this tool!).
6. Save
7. Import folder as a Project in Aperture.
8. Make non-destructive adjustments in Aperture.
9. Any dodge and burning with Lightzone.
10. Apologize to wife for not spending the time with her.
1. Develop, Dry, Cut
2. Scan into folder
3. Open files while scanning is going on in Photoshop. Decide on keepers.
4. Crop film holder edges out.
5. Use Spot healing brush for dust(I'm naming my first born after whoever developed this tool!).
6. Save
7. Import folder as a Project in Aperture.
8. Make non-destructive adjustments in Aperture.
9. Any dodge and burning with Lightzone.
10. Apologize to wife for not spending the time with her.
davidbivins
Established
I scan my b/w negatives as positives with a Nikon Coolscan 9000 ED with no adjustments at high resolution and save all frames from a roll to a single folder, named for the date, subject, camera, lens, film, ISO and developer.
I use "browse" in Photoshop to look through them and any keepers I open, invert, adjust levels in an adjustment layer (as necessary) and crop. I then save the PSD.
Given that I can use adjustment layers (and turn them off, adjust, or delete them), I don't bother saving separate versions.
Anything I wish to post online I save as a jpeg at 72dpi, 2048 width on the longest side, and mild sharpening. Other than that I don't keep separate versions.
I print at home with a HP printer with grayscale inks and simply adjust the master PSD for each print. Sometimes I'll save out a "printing" version if I'm going to print more than one copy.
I use "browse" in Photoshop to look through them and any keepers I open, invert, adjust levels in an adjustment layer (as necessary) and crop. I then save the PSD.
Given that I can use adjustment layers (and turn them off, adjust, or delete them), I don't bother saving separate versions.
Anything I wish to post online I save as a jpeg at 72dpi, 2048 width on the longest side, and mild sharpening. Other than that I don't keep separate versions.
I print at home with a HP printer with grayscale inks and simply adjust the master PSD for each print. Sometimes I'll save out a "printing" version if I'm going to print more than one copy.
MikeL
Go Fish
davidbivins said:
Hi David,
What is the advantage to saving the file as a PSD? I've been saving mine as Tif files like the original.
Thanks,
Mike
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
Man, you guys are doing way too much work. At least for colour negs you can get your lab to make digital "contact sheets" at the same time you have the negs processed. Then, pick the keepers and scan only those. The rest of the workflow ideas seem fine though.
For B&W, I Dev,dry and cut and inspect the negs on a lightbox with a loupe, and scan only the keepers. I've also had my local lab make true contact sheets of the B&W negs and inspect and select from those.
It makes little sense to scan everything (I can hear hours of my life being sucked away just thinking about it) if, like most photographers, only a small percentage are keepers. Besides, you can always consult a contact sheet and scan those "on second thought" negs later.
Ron
For B&W, I Dev,dry and cut and inspect the negs on a lightbox with a loupe, and scan only the keepers. I've also had my local lab make true contact sheets of the B&W negs and inspect and select from those.
It makes little sense to scan everything (I can hear hours of my life being sucked away just thinking about it) if, like most photographers, only a small percentage are keepers. Besides, you can always consult a contact sheet and scan those "on second thought" negs later.
Ron
Last edited: