> Yes, I'm not talking about these functions.
Then exactly what fundtions are you talking about? Resizing or resampling
functions? Crop functions? Color corections or contrast and brightness
adjustments? If these are what you are referring to, then I think one is
better off doing them in Photoshop than in the scanner software.
>> 3. With respect to color negative, scanner software frequently has
>> facilities to remove the orange masking from color negatives which
>> is not possible in the case of programs like Photoshop.
>
> Well, I've removed it in Photoshop.
Well, I suppose it is possible; but I have never been very successful
removing the orange masking with Photoshop. What I have been able to do has
always been more trouble than using the scanner software to do it. It can
be further complicated in that not all color negative films have the exact
same kind or color of masking; not to mention that a raw scan will give that
orange masking in a reversed color since raw scans do not change the
negative data into positive data. But if you find that it works for you to
use Photoshop to do this function, then so be it. Who am I to argue. :-)
>> In addition, I would use 16 bit linear or raw scans for the scanning
>> of positive transparancies but not with color negatives since the 16
>> bit scan does not permit one to eliminate the effect of the color
>> negative's orange masking from the outputted file.
>
> See above.
The problem is that a 16 bit linear raw scan of a color negative is exported
as is to Photoshop without being reversed or having the mask removed. This
means that you first have to remove the unreversed film mask before you can
reverse the negative into a positive image to do the other corrections. If
you do not, then the positive image will have all its colors effected by
varying color casts produced by the masking during the reversal processing
in Photoshop in often undertermined or undiscernable ways which makes color
correction and adjustments a real bear. When you reverse the raw scan all
the hues will be turned into their opposites. However, since the negative
colors are not pure reds, greens, etc. but are reds plus the orange mask,
greens plus the oragne mask, etc., the resulting output will not be the true
original capture colors on the negative unless you remove the mask before
you reverse the image.
> My guesses, and I'd love responses, of the Minolta software settings
> so to get a 'raw' type scan are:
>
> - 16bit linear (vs 16 bit)...and if you know the difference, let me know,
16 bit linear is an uncorrected 16 bit raw scan whereas 16 bit is a 16 bit
scan that has had some adjustments made to its histogram so as not to
produce an actual raw scan per se. If you want a true raw scan use the
linear. On second thought maybe I have it reversed? :-)
> - don't know about about autoexposure vs manual,
Like auto focus leave it at autoexposure unless you experience a problem.
> - autofocus unless there's a problem
> - don't know about multi-sampling
I am not sure you can use this feature for a raw scan. I suppose it would
depend on the software version ( my Minolta version does not even offer it;
but Vuescan does but not with a raw scan in my version of Vuescan )
> - don't know about color matching output space (adobe RGB?) and ICC
profiles
> - Color neg: best to scan as neg or positive? If positive, invert in PS?
> - B/W neg: best to scan as neg or positive? If positive, invert in PS?
In my opinion both should be scanned as negatives when possible; but
frequently a raw 16 bit lnear scan will not let you scan fil in any other
way except as a positive which will have to be inverted elsewhere
> - Fuj chromes: no idea
These are positive films and should be scanned as positives without reversal
> - ICE on, at least with color neg.
> - Grain dissolver off with color neg, don't know with b/w neg
Us ICE as needed for scratches and dust on color or chromogenic black and
white films only since it will not work well on silver halide black and
white films where the silver will block the infared rays from passing
thorugh the film. It will result in extended scan times and may not be able
to be used on raw scans. Use grain dissolver as needed for both color and
B&W films, although it might be more effective on B&W silver halide films
than on color or chromogenic films. However, like ICE it may not be able to
be used with raw scans.
filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk wrote:
>> 1. Many scanner software permits the user to do multi-pass scans
>> which may enable one to capture additional detail in the shadow
>> areas of positive films or the highlight areas of negative films.
>> 2. Many scanner software packages have digital ICE3 provisions
>> which rely on the scanner's hardware based infrared channel, which
>> would otherwise not be available from progframs like Photoshop.
>
> Yes, I'm not talking about these functions. These things are good,
> and the multi-pass scan is a hardware function (albeit controlled by
> sw). I don't know what ICE is, but I love it. If other sw can do a
> better "raw-scan" by opening some secret hardware-level nirvana, what
> are the sw settings to do so?
>
>
>> 3. With respect to color negative, scanner software frequently has
>> facilities to remove the orange masking from color negatives which
>> is not possible in the case of programs like Photoshop.
>
> Well, I've removed it in Photoshop.
>
>>
>>
>> In addition, I would use 16 bit linear or raw scans for the scanning
>> of positive transparancies but not with color negatives since the 16
>> bit scan does not permit one to eliminate the effect of the color
>> negative's orange masking from the outputted file.
>
> See above.
>
> My guesses, and I'd love responses, of the Minolta software settings
> so to get a 'raw' type scan are:
>
> - 16bit linear (vs 16 bit)...and if you know the difference, let me
> know,
> - don't know about about autoexposure vs manual,
> - autofocus unless there's a problem
> - don't know about multi-sampling
> - don't know about color matching output space (adobe RGB?) and ICC
> profiles
> - Color neg: best to scan as neg or positive? If positive, invert in
> PS?
> - B/W neg: best to scan as neg or positive? If positive, invert in PS?
> - Fuj chromes: no idea
> - ICE on, at least with color neg.
> - Grain dissolver off with color neg, don't know with b/w neg
>
> Best,
>
> David Carson
> web:
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>> filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk wrote:
>>> Ed,
>>>
>>> I think what I'm trying to get at is: Given a person with good
>>> Photoshop skills, is it an easier path to simply scan the neg in
>>> and modify it in Photoshop vs tweaking it in the scanning program
>>> and modifying it with the scan software?
>>>
>>> I'm coming from the viewpoint that the scanning software, be it
>>> Minolta's, Silverfast Ai, or vuescan, just is doing a crappier job
>>> of modifying the file POST scan, just as I could do with Photoshop
>>> in a better way. I've read reports to that effect.
>>>
>>> So, I'm asking if either of the above software packages modify
>>> anything PRE scan. If they don't, then:
>>>
>>> - does it matter what software package you use with the 5400,
>>>
>>> - what is the best setting to get the neg (both color and bw)
>>> scanned (16 bit, 16 bit linear, positive, whatever).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> -David Ray Carson
>>> web:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 01:46 AM 8/18/2004, you wrote:
>>>>> Ok, my head is swimming here. I've read elsewhere that the Minolta
>>>>> 1.1.5 software (actually, any software, silverfast and vuescan
>>>>> too) just modifies the scan at the software level, not the
>>>>> hardware level. I'm talking about 'exposure compensation' tab and
>>>>> 'image correction tab.'
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, for background, I'm a very competent Photoshop user, and I
>>>>> don't have a problem modifying the scan with PS levels, curves,
>>>>> hue, etc. I'm a newbie at scanning. So, my question to you guys is
>>>>> what is the best way (fastest, highest quality file) to use the
>>>>> 5400, especially with color neg:
>>>>>
>>>>> - scan in 16 bit color neg, or
>>>>>
>>>>> - scan in 16 bit linear color neg, or
>>>>>
>>>>> - scan in as color positive, either 16 bit or 16 bit linear
>>>>>
>>>>> - And what about black and white film?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Will either of the two commercial scanning software packages
>>>>> (silverfast or vuescan) give me better results if you look at my
>>>>> premise?
>>>>>
>>>>> I just can't seem to find the resources anywhere for these
>>>>> questions. Will the resultant file be a sort of 'digital neg' in
>>>>> the same fashion a RAW file is for digital cameras?
>>>>>
>>>>> I figure since PS CS can manipulate 16 bit files, it's faster and
>>>>> easier for me to adjust things like color balance, leves, etc in
>>>>> PS rather than dither away my time in whatever scanning software
>>>>> I'm using.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> -David Ray Carson
>>>>> web:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
>> Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/2004
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>> ----------
>> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
>> filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate)
>> in the message title or body
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate)
> in the message title or body
>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
> Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/04
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 8/6/04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
