Tony: Would you be so kind as to give a step by step outline of your technique
for dealing with color neg from exposure to final output? Am particularly
interested in how you are dealing with 1. inversion...do you do it with the
scan software or take it into PShop 2. setting white/black/gray points/ etc.
Thanx
Mike M.
Tony Sleep wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:54:57 -0400 Dave King (kingphoto@mindspring.com)
> wrote:
>
> > True, and I'm sure most of us take advantage of that range sometime or
> > the other, and goddam grateful for it too:). But if one had an
> > accurate colneg profile, I would think one could get as good first
> > results with varying negs scanning as in the darkroom. Can't really
> > blame a profile for not predicting light temp etc variables.
>
> Nope, you are quite right - a profile should classically be just be a
> straight translation mechanism. However... there is a case for a family of
> profiles which characterise the film under a variety of illuminant
> conditions. That seems to be what DH is proposing.
>
> > But a 'profile' scan of the flourescent green chrome would have the
> > same problem. It's going to come up looking pretty much like the
> > chrome, for better or worse. You're still stuck doing alot of work.
> > Profiling isn't intended to deal with variables, it's intended to
> > establish predictible accurate results under standard conditions.
>
> Yup. Except with colour neg, there's this whole range of not-very-standard
> conditions which have to be factored in. That's why nobody bothers with
> ICC for colour neg - a single, standard profile really doesn't get you
> very far. However I can forsee the ICC fundamentalists sharpening their
> knives and sparking a terminological Jihad : it may keep the peace better
> to stick with the standard understanding of a single profile, and offer
> preset adjustment macros to cope with the variables - or do as other s/w
> does, rely on adjustments based on white point or whatever.
>
> I now think a lot is possible here, having had to eat my words some months
> ago when I was arguing that manual corrections to colour neg appeared
> mandatory, and could never be done in software because human judgement
> and intent were involved. Just to make me look maximally silly, Ed Hamrick
> went and added some rather smart correction routines based on white
> point, which generally work extremely well and save me a lot of time.
>
> I'll be interested to see if the Polaroid approach works, and until then
> I'm not doing soothsaying again :)
>
> Regards
>
> Tony Sleep
> - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
> info & comparisons
