Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives  (Read 5100 times)

nwilliams770

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« on: August 19, 2014, 11:26:54 pm »

Hello Everyone,

As a recently graduated photography student, I've reverted back to film while saving for a digital camera. I'm experienced with 4x5, medium format, 35mm and in the past have always used Epson Scan to scan my negatives and process them (color, contrast, localized edits) in Photoshop.

I recently purchased Silverfast 8 SE (the entry-level version) however, and have been lost while researching the many options to scan/process negatives, there's are some routes I researched:
-Scanning with a program like Epson Scan or Silverfast, getting color and exposure as close as possible to desired result while scanning
-Scanning the negative as a film negative and converting it to a positive image in Photoshop with a plug-in like ColorPerfect
-Scanning the negative as a film negative and converting it to a positive image with Photoshop (this was the method I saw for using only Photoshop https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLc8rzLUbO4&list=UUN3IPP0EsFwzARONYMtfazQ&index=2)

Does anyone have insight, advice, personal experiences, suggestions, ideas to help me out?

I do LOVE using film but color, exposure, contrast difficulties have plagued my experience with scanning film for years and I'd like to develop a solid workflow

Thanks!
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2014, 11:56:29 pm »

What film and scanner do you use? 

I scan with a V600 Epson using their Epson scan program.  Never used Silverfast.  Why did you change if Epson Scan worked for you before?  Why fix it if it's not broken?

nwilliams770

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #2 on: August 20, 2014, 12:20:32 am »

Hi Alan,

Film I'm using now is Epson v750 with portra 400. Epson scan has given be good results but it hasn't been consistent with me in interpreting color which is why I wanted to explore some other options
Logged

rgs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 603
    • Richard Smith Photography
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #3 on: August 20, 2014, 12:56:35 am »

Hi Alan,

Film I'm using now is Epson v750 with portra 400. Epson scan has given be good results but it hasn't been consistent with me in interpreting color which is why I wanted to explore some other options

I have an Epson v700. I have mostly scanned Velvia chromes but occasional Fuji pro color negs as well. I don't have much Kodak color film. Most of my film work is either 6x7 or 4x5 which the Epson does a good job on. When I need 35mm scans (rarely cause I just didn't use 35mm much), I send it out. The Epson v700 (the v750 is basically the same machine) does not do as good on 35mm as on larger formats.

I am not sure if Silverfast SE is much better than the Epson software. Didn't your Epson v750 come with a better SilverFast version? I have Silverfast AI 6 which I use and like but, more often I use VueScan which I recommend. As well as being exceptional scanning software, VueScan has the advantage of being much cheaper than SilverFast and always having free upgrades.

I always scan chrome as chrome and negs as neg but I use multi-pass and multi-scan techniques. They increase d-max and reduce noise. I do not use any sharpening (save that for post) or Digital ICE. If I have to spot (frequently), I just take the time to do it. I scan only the images I think have value. I originally thought I would archive all my film but I have found that I don't have the time, patience, or storage capacity for that.

Hope this helps. Get VueScan. It's your best choice overall.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 07:30:35 am by rgs »
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #4 on: August 20, 2014, 02:40:01 am »

Get VueScan. It's your best choice overall.

+1

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

mediumcool

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 770
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #5 on: August 20, 2014, 07:27:45 am »

Shooting negs, general advice is that 2x exposure helps in making a better product for scanning. I have scanned under-exposed negs, and the results are not good. Kodak has long touted their Ektar 100 film as ideal for scanning.
Logged
FaceBook facebook.com/ian.goss.39   www.mlkshk.com/user/mediumcool

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2014, 08:17:45 am »

Shooting negs, general advice is that 2x exposure helps in making a better product for scanning. I have scanned under-exposed negs, and the results are not good. Kodak has long touted their Ektar 100 film as ideal for scanning.

Yes, I agree, Ektar is pretty good for scanning (also it's handling characteristics/scratch resistance).

As far as Portra is concerned, I always used to expose Portra 160 NC as ISO 125, and it's not that bad for scanning either. Of course one needs to expose correctly, for the shadows. A 2x exposure factor seems a bit too bold for my taste, but there is also quite a bit of variance due to processing. One should also make sure the quality control on that aspect is good.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

rgs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 603
    • Richard Smith Photography
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2014, 09:25:15 am »


As far as Portra is concerned, I always used to expose Portra 160 NC as ISO 125, and it's not that bad for scanning either. Of course one needs to expose correctly, for the shadows. A 2x exposure factor seems a bit too bold for my taste, but there is also quite a bit of variance due to processing.

Color neg film just gets finer and tighter grained with more exposure. Until the point is reached where the most of the exposure is on the toe of the film's response curve, usually 3 or 4 stops of overexposure (depending on the film), more exposure just increases quality.  When prints were made directly from the negs without a digital or scanned intermediate step, a common practice was "when in doubt, give it more". My negatives were bulletproof but printed really well and no one complained. Then digital printing arrived and negatives that overexposed were very difficult for the scanners in the machines to handle. My labs actually started calling and saying the negs were too dense for optimum printing so color neg had to be better exposed. As long as the scanner can handle the extra density, color neg improves with more light. 2xs is probably about as far as it is wise to go.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 10:38:04 am by rgs »
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2014, 09:35:49 am »

To NWilliams:

You may find these links useful:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/techniques/scanning_colour_negatives_raw_or_not.shtml

I am the author of the above two references. The book explores in more detail several of the options shown in the second link; (forgot to mention on first posting: the second link features SilverFast 6.6, whereas the book is up-to-date on SilverFast 8.

Taz Tally is the author of the reference below:

http://www.lynda.com/Home-Computing-Photo-Editing-tutorials/Scanning-SilverFast/93796-2.html?lpk2=93796&utm_source=embed%2Bvideo&utm_campaign=embed%2Bvideo&utm_content=Scanning%2Bwith%2BSilverFast%2B101863&utm_term=Course%2Blink

There are several other approaches using a DSLR instead of a scanner to make the original capture. They work but well-implemented set-up, lighting and exposure management is necessary, and a macro lens with good copy properties is highly recommended. Post-capture processing can involve SilverFast HDR, and/or Lightroom and/or Photoshop. I recommend experimenting with various approaches till you find the one you like best.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 03:56:36 pm by Mark D Segal »
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2014, 10:31:30 am »

Hi Alan,

Film I'm using now is Epson v750 with portra 400. Epson scan has given be good results but it hasn't been consistent with me in interpreting color which is why I wanted to explore some other options

Have you considered scanning flat and doing all your adjustments and editing in post processing?  Epson Scan, Silverfast and VueScan are basically scanning programs with post processing edits available for during the scan.  Of course, if you don't like the results, you have to re-scan.  By scanning flat, you scan once, and then reserve all the edits for afterwards.  You could try this approach and see if it works for you.  

regarding the best exposures settings, I bracket my shots.  You might try that too to see what exposures work best for you.  Good luck.  Alan.

Dave Gurtcheff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 696
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2014, 06:05:22 pm »

I am 77 years old, and had a chemical darkroom for many years, and routinely made 16"x20" prints from color negatives, so I had a lifetime's work in negatives when we moved, and down sized to digital. I used a Polaroid 120 Sprintscan until it died, and now use a Nikon Coolscan 8000. I use Vuescan scanning software, as it supports both orphaned scanners, plus my Epson V700 flat bed. In printing in the darkroom, I ALWAYS over exposed color negatives...it gave finer grain, and of course better shadow detail. I still scan those old (over exposed) color negs with my Nikon and Vuescan with wonderful results. If you visit my web site, you can see literally hundreds and hundreds of examples scanned from color negs. My images are cataloged such as D100, D500, etc, and S100, S200, etc. The "S" prefix means "scanned" from a negative, while the "D" prefix indicates a digital file. I think you might agree the  "D" images are no better or worse than the "S" images. Just to give you an idea of results obtainable by scanning color negs please go to:
www.modernpictorials.com

Best regards and good luck
Dave Gurtcheff
Beach Haven, NJ
Logged

nwilliams770

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #11 on: August 30, 2014, 01:45:24 pm »

Hi all!

Thanks for all the great advice, I always have overexposed color negs but a stop, it's just the way I was taught dealing with color film. I have tried out vuescan and the results are definitely more of what I'm looking for. Thanks again everyone!
Logged

ChuckT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
Re: Scanning & Processing Color Negatives
« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2014, 11:05:04 am »

One additional thing you should consider (and is seldom mentioned) - scanners will pick up surface imperfections (well duh!). I suspect that Kodak's recommended film has a smoother emulsion surface (!). Also it is possible that the splitter knives in _that_ coating gallery are maintained a little bit better - less detritus on the film. One big difference I have seen with scanning software is that one will refer to a film as "Professional nnnn" and another "Daylight Color mxm". We are left to discover just what they are labeling. Tower of Babel all over again.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up