Hi All,
I was very interested to hear your method of operation Tony. I too have
developed a technique purely by trial and error over the years together with
some reading up. My method is almost identical to yours especially:
1.When scanning have the darkest area a dark grey and the lightest
I am really enjoying the email on workflow and hope that others will post
theirs. I remember Johnny Deadman offering to write down his workflow once,
but it was just before I went offline for a few weeks and I never did get to
see it.
I find it enormously helpful to learn how folks go about
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 11:28:21 -0600 Michael Moore ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
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
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 09:34:30 -0700 Shough, Dean ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
I think I missed this. What settings do you use to access this type of
correction?
Ed has a variety of colour correction routines built into Vuescan - eg
'neutral', 'tungsten' etc. 'White balance' is another on the
: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proile scheme
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 11:28:21 -0600 Michael Moore ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
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
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:54:57 -0400 Dave King ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
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
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
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
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:45:13 -0400 Dave King ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Sorry Tony, but I don't agree with this. Neg films vary primarily in
the mask layer.
But that seems to be a variable, since mask density appears to vary
according to processing.
Processing is standardized by
From: Tony Sleep [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 18:45:13 -0400 Dave King
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Sorry Tony, but I don't agree with this. Neg films vary primarily
in
the mask layer.
But that seems to be a variable, since mask density appears to vary
according to
Maris wrote:
I take Ed's comment, that the goal is a *custom* base removal for that any
particular film, and to make the image look as much like the original scene
as possible, means making it look like the original as captured by that
particular film, but not making it look like the original as
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:20:40 -0400 Dave King ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
If the film
terms for the SS4000 didn't give you this, either the terms weren't
accurate, the scanner wasn't calibrated well, or your system's CM
wasn't set up correctly.
This would be true of slide, but there's
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 20:13:52 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
That is what I believed you would say, and I completely disagree with
that
philosophy. Films have certain characteristics that photographers use
particular films for. I don't want every film to give me the same
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 00:23:25 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
...but film
characteristic profiling is different than the specific conditions you
mentioned above, isn't it?
Not for colour negs - the characteristics are annoyingly mutable,
depending on exposure, processing
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 19:13:30 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Ever think something you did was
just great (even a print you made)
Not for more than a few minutes. And it's very cruel of you to ask this
g
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Tony Sleep wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 10:20:40 -0400 Dave King ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
If the film
terms for the SS4000 didn't give you this, either the terms weren't
accurate, the scanner wasn't calibrated well, or your system's CM
wasn't set up
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 00:23:25 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
...but film
characteristic profiling is different than the specific
conditions you
mentioned above, isn't it?
Not for colour negs - the characteristics are annoyingly mutable,
depending on exposure,
Rafe wrote:
I've generally found those film-type profiles
(not the ICC kind, but the kind you find in some
film-scanner-drivers) to be useful, at best,
as starting points. Interesting that NikonScan
(3.1, at least) doesn't have them at all, yet
does a pretty good job at inverting negatives
Interesting that NikonScan
(3.1, at least) doesn't have them at all, yet
does a pretty good job at inverting negatives
and coming up with useful, believable images
with different types of negative film.
I find that somewhat more than interesting. If Nikonscan has no
profiles, how does it
At 06:45 PM 6/11/01 -0400, Dave King wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 00:23:25 -0400 Austin Franklin
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
...but film
characteristic profiling is different than the specific
conditions you
mentioned above, isn't it?
Not for colour negs - the characteristics are
The Leafscan never had any film profiles, and it's been the
staple of high
end scanners for over 10 years.
The 8000 ED gives it a nice run for the money, Austin.
I dare say -- it's even better. Though I don't expect
you'll agree, without some convincing.
I'd have to see a BW scan
- Original Message -
From: rafeb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proile
scheme
At 06:45 PM 6/11/01 -0400, Dave King wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 00:23:25 -0400 Austin Franklin
In a message dated 6/8/2001 8:11:44 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I remember reading something in the Vuescan manual which
said something about 'making the image look as much like the original scene
as possible'. In other words, applying a inverse HD curve, presumably,
plus
a custom
on 6/10/01 6:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I remember reading something in the Vuescan manual which
said something about 'making the image look as much like the original scene
as possible'. In other words, applying a inverse HD curve, presumably,
plus
a custom base
In a message dated 6/10/2001 9:23:24 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
your design goal is to eliminate the specific characteristics of individual
emulsions???
The design goal is to reproduce the actual scene as much as
possible. Displaying the scene on a calibrated monitor should
look
At 23:07 08/06/01, you wrote:
Do minilabs read the emulsion type before printing neg? No.
My lab once told me that my prints were not up to their usual excellence
because we haven't got the Supra profile right yet. So I understand that
minilabs DO use individual film profiles for some
The point of using profiles of course is to match the scanner's filter
characteristics (or LED bandwidth) with the film response curves
I don't believe that's quite right. Those are two separate issues.
Typically, there is a CCD response curve embedded in the scanner in the form
of a LUT,
David, concerning Polaroid's negative profiling plans for the SS 120, you've
received some "why bother" and "it's a bad idea" comments from Austin
Franklin while Isaac Crawford defended the idea.
I, also, think there's merit in your plan and I hope it works. Do you think
it will work well
I guess for someone who doesn't want to go beyond pushbutton
scanning (or as
I said above, as a starting point), it is probably better for them. I'd
prefer to lessen the automation, and teach people how to do the
basics, that
way they can get a perfect scan most every time...and rely
Austin Franklin wrote:
Austin Franklin wrote:
I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are color
managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer
etc. Those are
all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from
deterministic.
Too
David, concerning Polaroid's negative profiling plans for the SS 120,
you've
received some why bother and it's a bad idea comments from Austin
Franklin while Isaac Crawford defended the idea.
I'm sorry that I gave the impression that it's a bad idea. I don't think
it's a bad idea, I just
With one film term for transparencies and color management,
individual
film characteristics is exactly what you do get. *Effective* film
terms for color negative films will get closer to a specific
films'
characteristics, not further away, and the problem to solve is
ineffective film
Austin Franklin wrote:
I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are
color
managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer
etc. Those are
all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from
deterministic.
Too many variables, lighting,
Austin Franklin wrote:
I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are
color
managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer
etc. Those are
all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from
deterministic.
Too many variables, lighting,
I suggest
you have a look at the recent thread on the topic of the use of
profiles in scanning and the relative merit thereof on the colorsync
list.
Thanks. I will take a spin through the archives...but would you mind
pointing me to where the list is?
Since any modern hi-end scanner will allow either approach
What other scanner have film profiles?
I fail to
see the reason for your original post.
I was questioning the reality of the usefulness of film profiles, given the
inability to actually control a number of the variables. Simple as
I suggest
you have a look at the recent thread on the topic of the use of
profiles in scanning and the relative merit thereof on the
colorsync
list.
Thanks. I will take a spin through the archives...but would you
mind
pointing me to where the list is?
I'm sorry that I gave the impression that it's a bad idea. I don't think
it's a bad idea, I just don't see the merit in it, at least for me.
The CO2 expelled to get to this point has just brought my lawn, and 3
rhododendron back to life! ;-p
Todd
LOL... Good god. Some people REALLY like to hear/read themselves speak
don't they?
Lawrence
The CO2 expelled to get to this point has just brought my lawn, and 3
rhododendron back to life! ;-p
Todd
I´m on, remember me the distributor in sweden that you helped our decades
ago when I had a ss120 and no drivers... Still remember the beer I promised
you...
Best regards, Stefan
on 01-06-06 23.41, Hemingway, David J at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Polaroid is developing a new scheme for
With one film term for transparencies and color management, individual
film characteristics is exactly what you do get. *Effective* film
terms for color negative films will get closer to a specific films'
characteristics, not further away, and the problem to solve is
ineffective film terms.
Austin wrote:
I completely disagree with that
philosophy. Films have certain characteristics that photographers
use
particular films for. I don't want every film to give me the same
results!
People never did this in the darkroom, so why do it in digital?
With one film term for
Austin Franklin wrote:
I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are color
managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer etc. Those are
all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from deterministic.
Too many variables, lighting, exposure,
Austin Franklin wrote:
I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are color
managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer
etc. Those are
all deterministic. Film is image dependant, and is far from
deterministic.
Too many variables, lighting,
Polaroid is developing a new scheme for negative profile's. I
am looking
for any Sprintscan 120 user who would like to help evaluate this
new scheme.
Perhaps you could explain exactly what you mean by negative profiles, and
why one would need them.
related profiles to address common exposure differences.
All to get better scans quicker.
David
-Original Message-
From: Austin Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 7:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative
, 2001 8:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative
proile scheme
Austin,
All scanning software characterises film in some way as an
attempt to get
you near where you want to be. You can still use your
individual artistic
talents to effect
Austin,
All scanning software characterises film in some way as an attempt to get
you near where you want to be. You can still use your individual artistic
talents to effect the final product.
In no scanner software of which I am aware will give you by
default the raw
data from the ccd.
]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 7:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative
proile scheme
Polaroid is developing a new scheme for negative
profile's. I
am looking
for any Sprintscan 120 user who would like to help evaluate
These negative profiles will
be similar wich ring around sub sets
What's a ring around sub sets?
to correct for specific conditions
such as over exposure, underexposure, high or low contrast,
But isn't that what a tonal curve adjustment box is supposed to do, or are
you saying you will
50 matches
Mail list logo
