filmscanners: SS4000 and Insight/Vuescan software ?
When I use the SS4000 with the Insight software and I use the Adobe1998 setting in Insight, Photoshop still asks me if I want to convert the image to Adobe 1998. When I use VueScan with Adobe1998 selected, I don't get the "ask when color profile mismatch" box when opening the image in Photoshop. A second question is: is there a VueScan plugin for Photoshop so that it will appear on the File/Import scanner menu? Stan Schwartz http://home.swbell.net/snsok
Re: filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.x suggestion
Ed: I found the same with Vuescan vs. PS 5 for both slides and negatives on my LS-30. I rescanned but with the brightness set at 1.3 for the slide and negative rather than .7. The slide was fine, the negative was OK but with less contrast than the slide. Gordon shAf wrote: > Ed makes us aware ... > > however, what > Vuescan shows me and what I end up with in Photoshop is quite > different (what being acceptable ends up in PS, Vuescan showing me a > darker image). > > shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: orange mask
>I don't know why all scanners don't handle orange mask by looking at a bit >of leader or inter-frame unexposed area and automatically determine the >_exact_ mask for each film. Do any of them? It would seem much easier >than any other way? The Kodak RFS 3600 does. Paul http://okphoto.webjump.com P:250-498-2800 F:250-498-6876
Re: filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.x problem
shAf previously wrote ... > I seemed to have fixed my previous problem with v.6.4.9 (... > scanning a disk file and it coming up non-rotated and as a negative > ...) by restarting Vuescan. (What changed shall remain a mystery, but > I hate it when that happens ...*smile*...) > ... I have since fixed another problem by restarting Vuescan. In this case ... I inserted another negative frame (LS-2000 film strip holder) and scanned as before ... it resulted in a very fast result, which in the end was a ~10% width of the preview selection along the long dimension of the frame. Without changing anything, I exited VS and restarted ... after noting all my pareameters remained the same, I again previewed and scanned ... perfect result ... strange, hey!? shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Re: So it's the bits?
>No, they are claiming even more specifically ... and I quote from >http://www.klt.co.jp/Nikon/Press_Release/ls-4000.html >... >Density range 4.2 Interesting. A Nikon product data sheet for the 4000 ED and model comparison sheet, provided by Nikon at this past week's Mac World, both use the phrase "Dynamic Range" (and give 4.2). However the 8000 ED product sheet reads "Density range 4.2" (though the product comparison sheet that includes the 8000 ED states "Dynamic Range"). -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.x suggestion
Ed makes us aware ... > I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. > ... I seemed to have fixed my previous problem with v.6.4.9 (... scanning a disk file and it coming up non-rotated and as a negative ...) by restarting Vuescan. (What changed shall remain a mystery, but I hate it when that happens ...*smile*...) I am now getting very good results by following your suggestion for setting the 'brightness' to 0.7 for negatives ... however, what Vuescan shows me and what I end up with in Photoshop is quite different (what being acceptable ends up in PS, Vuescan showing me a darker image). One suggestion for VS6.5 would be for an accurate preview/scan display in Vuescan. I have learned to trust what VS delivers in spite of what it shows me, but newcomers will surely modify the brightness setting based on what Vuescan shows them. Why the difference? Is it simply not knowing what the display ICM is?? shAf :o)
filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.9 negative mask query
Ed makes us aware: > I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. > ... I wanted to play with setting the exposure and mask values as described in the help file. My procedure was to try and pick a normally exposed negative with "auto" settings for exposure and mask ... but as it turned out the image should have been good for exposure, but it didn't contain neutral blacks. So I fixed the exposure settings and left the mask setting to auto. I then put in a blank frame which should have represented a "black" frame. However, when I scanned it didn't turn out black, rather a grainy neutral shade of "off white". Why, given the previously determined exposure, did this scan not result in black? (H? ... let me ask the question, but play with different whitepoint and blackpoint settings) shAf :o) (Vuescan for Windows and Nikon LS-2000)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan problems
Ed, Just downloaded 6.4.8 and it seems to have solved the problem - perfect scan of a negative that before was very dark using 6.4.1. Back to the usual excellence of VueScan. Thanks John Hinkey wrote: > > I too have experienced the same exact problem with my SS4000. I'm > running version 6.4.1. Like you slide scanning is perfectly normal. I > thought it was just me having a setting somewhere out of wack, but the > last few negatives I've scanned were VERY dark - thus requiring the > brightness to be set something like 50 or so. The resulting scan is > useable with a lot of tweeking in Vuescan and Photoshop. The negative > looks pretty well exposed. > > Ed - what do you think could be the problem? > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I'm having some trouble with scanning negatives in the lastest Vuescan > > releases, 6.47 and 6.4.8 running under Win98 with a Canoscan FS2710. > > > > When using all default settings, when I preview or use a full scan, the > > images come out black. If I boost the Brightness to 50, they appear to be > > inverted along with a very severe cyan cast on top of the inversion. The > > scans also seem to be excessively noisy or grainy. I have an example at: > > > > http://www.lawair.com/vue/cyan.jpg > > > > Now, if I change the media type from color negative to image and reduce the > > brightness to .2, I get an image that looks normal, but with very little > > saturation. > > > > http://www.lawair.com/vue/image.jpg > > > > Like I said, these scans were made with default settings. The color balance > > is White Point. If I use other color balance settings (auto levels, > > neutral, etc) I will get different color casts like yellow or green. > > Chaning the film type makes a slight difference in the hue and intesity of > > the casts, but no substanive difference. Same with using different color > > spaces. > > > > For reference, I reinstalled Vuescan 6.3.4 (the next most recent version of > > Vuescan that I have) and scanning negatives worked without a hitch. Same > > with using the Canon software to scan negatives. Slide scanning in 6.4.8 > > works fine as well. > > > > Thanks for any help. > > > > Jeremy I. Caplan > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > John Hinkey > Seattle, Washington > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- John Hinkey Seattle, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.9 focus query
Ed makes us aware ... > I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. > ... questions with this version: (1)How do I make manual focus adjustments? My understanding is it will focus based on the selection area in the preview window. However, if "focus" is set to 'none', and I ask for a 'device|focus', the focus value does not change. It would seem to me this value should update every time I move the selection area and ask for a focus. Even if it was set for 'focus=preview', I couldn't detect that VS was changing the focus if I previewed the device .. the focus value remained the same. The focus value finally changed when I inserted a new film frame and previewed. (2)follows this message
RE: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
Gamut refers to the range of colors that can be reproduced. Color intensity is not a term I'm familiar with, but I suspect you mean color saturation or purity. That is only one dimension of color gamut. One way of defining a color is in terms of hue, saturation, and brightness. Chromaticity diagrams usually only show saturation and hue, brightness being a third dimension extending out of the paper. But gamut is the three-dimensional volume of HSB that a particular device or technology can present. There is more to green than darkness and brightness. There is how much of other colors are mixed in with it (the purity or saturation of the green) while still giving the impression of the color green. Obviously a point is reached where we can't decide (for example) whether the color is green or cyan because of the amount of blue mixed in with it (taking within the RGB domain). In fact you can have a considerable amount of red and blue mixed in with green and it will still more or less look like green. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Woodworth > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 12:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners > > > An beginner speaks: > > Doesn't Gamut refer to the range of intensity of a color? This refers to > the difference between the darkest dark a device can render a particular > color to how its brightest bright. > > I don't see how the number of bits has much to do with the gamut. The > number of bits will determine the number of shades possible between the > darkest and the brightest but not the range (which is the gamut). > > So, the gamut for a green box of crayons refers to the range between the > darkest and the brightest green crayon. The number of crayons (if it's > greater than two) doesn't influence the gamut (range) but does > refer to the > subtlety of shading achievable. > > N'est pas? > > Ref: Photoshop 5 Artistry by Barry Haynes and Wendy Crumpler, > Pub. New Rider
RE: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
> Some areas > of hue may > have a wider saturation than others. Actually, to speak more precisely, we would say that some areas of COLOR have more or less saturation in their hue than others. Hues can have various amounts of saturation. A specific color contains a specific amount of hue, saturation, and brightness (in the HSB domain). Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andrew Rodney > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 1:15 PM > To: Film Scanners; John Woodworth > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners > > > on 1/13/01 1:24 PM, John Woodworth at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I don't see how the number of bits has much to do with the gamut. > > It doesn't. > > > The > > number of bits will determine the number of shades possible between the > > darkest and the brightest but not the range (which is the gamut). > > The number of bits doesn't even have to do with the shades > possible. You've > got to have 1000 shades first and then the added bit depth can be useful. > But you can have a high bit file with a lot fewer shades and a 24 bit file > with more shades. The math leads many to believe that more bits means more > shades. In theory you can have more shades and divide them up finer with > more bits but you have to actually have the shades to begin with. A 48 bit > file of a black wall doesn't have as many shades as a 24 bit file of a > continuous tone scene. > > > So, the gamut for a green box of crayons refers to the range between the > > darkest and the brightest green crayon. > > Colorspaces are three dimensional. Visualize a globe, much like our earth. > From the center of the globe to the outer edge to the equator is one axis > that can describe brightness (let's say the center is as black as > black can > be, zero), the edge is as white as white can be (255). The > circumference is > the hue (360 degrees) of color (good old Roy G Biv). From the > center to one > pole is saturation (from zero saturation or neutral to the most saturated > color that can be produced in this colorspace). In a way, you can think of > the gamut as the range from neutral to fully saturated a color > can be but of > course we have the circumference to contend with too. Some areas > of hue may > have a wider saturation than others. >
filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.9 problem
Ed makes us aware ... > I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. Problem scanning Supra100 negative film with my LS-2000 with Vuescan for Windows. It worked ok when I scanned negative film and cropped directly to a 48bit TIFF. However, when I wanted to experiment with some mask settings and crop from a disk file, I end up with a non-rotated negative image. It didn't seem to pay attention to my wanting to flip the file (rotate 180), my implication it was a 'device|mediatype|color negative', and my settings for it being 'media|kodak|supra|100' (???) shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of shAf > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 10:45 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners > > > Frank writes ... > > > > Andrew wrote: > > > > > > No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 > different > > > colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. > > > > > > > > > > That's not necessarily true at all. ... > > Andrew's analogy does work because we all know how crayons are > boxed. A 50/box would include all basic colors ... a 100/box would > enrichen the gamut (and provide some intermediates). That's not necessarily true and what does "enrich the gamut" mean? Providing intermediates does not increase the gamut. Talking about crayons is a stupid discussion, because it's a poor analogy for gamut, but I'll bet that a box of 8 crayons covers the gamut and the box of 64 just provides intermediates and does not increase the gamut. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
on 1/13/01 1:24 PM, John Woodworth at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I don't see how the number of bits has much to do with the gamut. It doesn't. > The > number of bits will determine the number of shades possible between the > darkest and the brightest but not the range (which is the gamut). The number of bits doesn't even have to do with the shades possible. You've got to have 1000 shades first and then the added bit depth can be useful. But you can have a high bit file with a lot fewer shades and a 24 bit file with more shades. The math leads many to believe that more bits means more shades. In theory you can have more shades and divide them up finer with more bits but you have to actually have the shades to begin with. A 48 bit file of a black wall doesn't have as many shades as a 24 bit file of a continuous tone scene. > So, the gamut for a green box of crayons refers to the range between the > darkest and the brightest green crayon. Colorspaces are three dimensional. Visualize a globe, much like our earth. >From the center of the globe to the outer edge to the equator is one axis that can describe brightness (let's say the center is as black as black can be, zero), the edge is as white as white can be (255). The circumference is the hue (360 degrees) of color (good old Roy G Biv). From the center to one pole is saturation (from zero saturation or neutral to the most saturated color that can be produced in this colorspace). In a way, you can think of the gamut as the range from neutral to fully saturated a color can be but of course we have the circumference to contend with too. Some areas of hue may have a wider saturation than others. When you look at a plot of a devices gamut, you are looking at two of the three possible dimensions. Some products allow one to load an ICC profile and rotate the gamut 3 dimensionally and that's really helpful for evaluating the color gamut and getting a better idea of the colorspace. The gamut of the green part of our box of crayons gives us an idea of how saturated a green we are able to produce. Go into Photoshop and pick 255G 0B 0R and you'll see a little exclamation which indicates that this color is out of gamut for whatever CMYK profile you happen to have loaded. Doesn't matter, you'll never be able to output 255G 0B 0R in CMYK. If you click on the green square under this exclamation which looks more muted, Photoshop will select the closest green within gamut for this CMYK model. So what you are seeing is that this is the greenest green you could produce to this device. The original green is way out of gamut. Try loading other CMYK profiles and the green that is picked within gamut will change (some more green some less green i.e. Closer or farther from your original goal of 255G). Andrew Rodney
Re: filmscanners: orange mask
- Original Message - From: "Mike Finley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : I find the mask (film base) on XP2 varies substantially (in both density and : tint) depending on who develops it, so I wouldn't be surprised if the orange : base does on colour. ~~ When XP1 film dev was sold by Ilford it was my first choice in developer for all our colour film. We found that the slightly longer dev time of 5 minutes and the presumably accurate chemistry makeup gave superb consistency.We often were able to get Hand made prints spot on fist time through without the constant minute filtration changes that the Kodak and Agfa Developers gave us . We are finding that Fuji 400 scans very well without the harsh granular appearance that some neg film give. The advice given to me by our drum scanner manufacturer was to scan the negs slightly out of focus and then sharpen in Photoshop afterwards,something I have however been reluctant to do.the theory being that the graininess would be less apparent ! regards Michael Wilkinson. 106 Holyhead Road,Ketley, Telford.Shropshire TF 15 DJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.infocus-photography.co.uk For Trannies and Negs from Digital Files
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
An beginner speaks: Doesn't Gamut refer to the range of intensity of a color? This refers to the difference between the darkest dark a device can render a particular color to how its brightest bright. I don't see how the number of bits has much to do with the gamut. The number of bits will determine the number of shades possible between the darkest and the brightest but not the range (which is the gamut). So, the gamut for a green box of crayons refers to the range between the darkest and the brightest green crayon. The number of crayons (if it's greater than two) doesn't influence the gamut (range) but does refer to the subtlety of shading achievable. N'est pas? Ref: Photoshop 5 Artistry by Barry Haynes and Wendy Crumpler, Pub. New Rider At 10:44 AM 1/13/01 -0800, you wrote: >Frank writes ... > > > > Andrew wrote: > > > > > > No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 >different > > > colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. > > > > > > > > > > That's not necessarily true at all. ... > > Andrew's analogy does work because we all know how crayons are >boxed. A 50/box would include all basic colors ... a 100/box would >enrichen the gamut (and provide some intermediates). Andrew knows how >difficult a chromacity diagram is to describe ... you can find some >excellent examples and good explanations and advice at these Bruce >Fraser's articles: >http://www.creativepro.com/author/home/0,1819,40,00.html > > Bruce's "Real World PS6" (when it finally arrives) should be >anyone's CMS bible. > >shAf :o)
filmscanners: VueScan 6.4.9 Available
I just released VueScan 6.4.9 for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. It can be downloaded from: http://www.hamrick.com/vsm.html What's new in version 6.4.9 * Fixed problem with VueScan failing on startup * Fixed problem with scanning negatives on Canon FS2710 * Added support for Polaroid SprintScan 45 Regards, Ed Hamrick
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
Frank writes ... > > Andrew wrote: > > > > No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 different > > colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. > > > > > > That's not necessarily true at all. ... Andrew's analogy does work because we all know how crayons are boxed. A 50/box would include all basic colors ... a 100/box would enrichen the gamut (and provide some intermediates). Andrew knows how difficult a chromacity diagram is to describe ... you can find some excellent examples and good explanations and advice at these Bruce Fraser's articles: http://www.creativepro.com/author/home/0,1819,40,00.html Bruce's "Real World PS6" (when it finally arrives) should be anyone's CMS bible. shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
At 08:58 AM 1/13/01 -0700, Andrew Rodney wrote: >No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 different >colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. Say what??? There's no reason at all that the box of 50 crayons could represent a far wider gamut than the 100 crayons in that "other" box. I think I know what you meant to say, but this was not a particularly precise way of putting it! rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
on 1/13/01 10:07 AM, Frank Paris at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That's not necessarily true at all. The 50 colors could have a much wider > gamut than the 100 if for example the 100 were different shades of green and > red but it didn't have any blues, and the set of 50 had shades of all three. Naturally if the 100 colors were all shades of green and the 50 had a mix of other colors. The analogy was intended to be quite simplistic. Therefore, if I have a mix of RGB crayons and have 50 that compose those colors but you have 100, you'll have a wider gamut. You're not going to find a Working Space whereby all the colors are in one area of the CIE chart (all green or biased towards green) but sRGB having a more equal mix of RGB primaries thus making sRGB wider. > Of course that's not how boxes of crayons are usually put together, but this > is not a good analogy to explain what a color gamut is. A CIE chromaticity > diagram is good for that. True but it's not easy to describe a CIE chromaticity diagram without a picture, hence the crayon analogy. I haven't purchased crayons in decades but I don't recall every getting a box of just green but rather a mix spanning the color wheel. > The book *Digital Color Management* defines color > gamut as "the limits of the array of colors that can be captured by an > image-capturing device... A display has a gamut as do output devices. The description above sounds like it's talking about input (image capturing devices). It's semantics at this point. The definition above is adequate for this discussion. > Then on page > 113 of *Information Visualization* is a color gamut chart that shows the > monitor gamut far exceeding the gamut of printed inks and the gamut of > printed inks entirely within the gamut of the monitor I don't buy that! There are greens and cyan's in a CMYK SWOP like gaumt that fall outside monitor gamut. A monitor can't display a pure cyan. In the enclosed gamut map you cans see that the TR001 SWOP profile has areas that fall outside ColorMatch RGB (a Working Space based on the PressView display and about as wide a gamut for a display as you'll find). I hope sending this 35k attachment is OK with the list. I used Gretag's ProfileMaker Pro to map the ICC profiles of these two devices. In any event, typical display gamuts (and all the RGB Working Spaces) are triangular in shape and it's quite common for some output devices to have areas that fall inside of and outside of this shape. Output devices usually don't have this typical triangular shape. Again, look at the gamut map enclosed. Andrew Rodney SWOP vs. ColorMatch
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
Andrew writes ... > on 1/12/01 10:38 PM, Robert E. Wright at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Does a wider gamut reflect higher resolution or even more information? > > There is a difference between outputing to a profile and outputing a wider > > gamut. > > No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 different > colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. I would claim there is more information in the wider gamut (not the type of info which would make the file size larger of course). I'd describe the crayon analogy slightly differently. "You draw a picture with all 100 crayons ... take a picture ... scan into a variety of color spaces. In the sRGB image you can only count 50 unique colors, ... in the AdobeRGB, you count 75, ... in Colormatch, again you count 75 but these are slightly different from AdobeRGB, ... and in wide gamut RGB, you count 95." (These analogies also presume you have a perfect display). shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andrew Rodney > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 7:58 AM > To: Film Scanners; Robert E. Wright > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners > > > on 1/12/01 10:38 PM, Robert E. Wright at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 different > colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. > > Andrew Rodney > That's not necessarily true at all. The 50 colors could have a much wider gamut than the 100 if for example the 100 were different shades of green and red but it didn't have any blues, and the set of 50 had shades of all three. Of course that's not how boxes of crayons are usually put together, but this is not a good analogy to explain what a color gamut is. A CIE chromaticity diagram is good for that. The book *Digital Color Management* defines color gamut as "the limits of the array of colors that can be captured by an image-capturing device, represented by a color-encoding data metric, or physically realized by an output device or medium." Page 260 of this book shows a chromaticity diagram in which the video gamut (based on existing video standards) lies entirely within the photographic gamut. Then on page 113 of *Information Visualization* is a color gamut chart that shows the monitor gamut far exceeding the gamut of printed inks and the gamut of printed inks entirely within the gamut of the monitor. However, the former chart (monitor vs. photographic) is for a variety of photographic image forming dyes so no particular color photographic material would cover that wide a gamut. This is probably why I have elsewhere seen diagrams where portions of the monitor gamut lie outside portions of particular photographic materials. Frank Paris [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan problems
Deleted vuescan.ini - great scans from both slides and negs seems to be back ! EE> Win98, LS-30, Vuescan 6.4.8, Royal Gold (gen2) 200, White Balance, otherwise EE> default settings, and the scans are beautiful! >> llc> I'm having some trouble with scanning negatives in the >> lastest Vuescan >> llc> releases, 6.47 and 6.4.8 running under Win98 with a Canoscan FS2710. >> >> llc> When using all default settings, when I preview or use a >> full scan, the >> llc> images come out black. >> >> I got the same picture with LS-30. Extremely dark and low >> contrast scans for >> Kodak RC 400. With 2.5 brightness I ended up with low saturated >> low contrast >> reddish scans. >> -- Best regards, Alexander
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
on 1/12/01 10:38 PM, Robert E. Wright at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Does any scanner really output a gamut wider than sRGB? ( exclude high end > PMT Drum scanners) Yes, lots of them! > Does a wider gamut reflect higher resolution or even more information? > There is a difference between outputing to a profile and outputing a wider > gamut. No, more colors. You have a box of crayons that contains 100 different colors, I have 50. Your box has a larger color gamut than mine. Andrew Rodney
RE: filmscanners: orange mask
Improper film storage and handling prior to processing plays a big part in the consistency of color and density characteristics of the orange mask. Also when referring to the word "lot" are you speaking of same film type but different batch or are you referring to Kodak versus Fuji? Different film types (Kodak, Fuji) will definitely show visual differences in the orange mask. Also different ISO ratings have differences as well. Paul > >Problem is that the color characteristics > >of the orange mask vary -- from one film > >lot to another, and in particular, as a > >function of the processing of the film. > > >[rafe b:] >I can't say for certain, but my gut (and >my eyes) disagree with you. Plus, I have >heard this from others. > >I'd be curious to hear other folks' >experiences and thoughts on this. http://okphoto.webjump.com P:250-498-2800 F:250-498-6876
RE: filmscanners: orange mask
I find the mask (film base) on XP2 varies substantially (in both density and tint) depending on who develops it, so I wouldn't be surprised if the orange base does on colour. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of rafeb Sent: 13 January 2001 13:00 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: filmscanners: orange mask At 01:45 PM 1/12/01 -0800, Eli Bowen wrote: >I don't believe the processing of the film has any effect on the orange >mask, unless there is something horrendously wrong with the processing. [rafe b:} >Problem is that the color characteristics >of the orange mask vary -- from one film >lot to another, and in particular, as a >function of the processing of the film. [rafe b:] I can't say for certain, but my gut (and my eyes) disagree with you. Plus, I have heard this from others. It might be that the processing affects the color balance in some mannner, which I simply attributed to a change in the orange mask. I'd be curious to hear other folks' experiences and thoughts on this. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: orange mask
At 01:45 PM 1/12/01 -0800, Eli Bowen wrote: >I don't believe the processing of the film has any effect on the orange >mask, unless there is something horrendously wrong with the processing. [rafe b:} >Problem is that the color characteristics >of the orange mask vary -- from one film >lot to another, and in particular, as a >function of the processing of the film. [rafe b:] I can't say for certain, but my gut (and my eyes) disagree with you. Plus, I have heard this from others. It might be that the processing affects the color balance in some mannner, which I simply attributed to a change in the orange mask. I'd be curious to hear other folks' experiences and thoughts on this. rafe b.
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan problems
Win98, LS-30, Vuescan 6.4.8, Royal Gold (gen2) 200, White Balance, otherwise default settings, and the scans are beautiful! > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alexander > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 3:51 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: EdHamrick > Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan problems > > > > llc> I'm having some trouble with scanning negatives in the > lastest Vuescan > llc> releases, 6.47 and 6.4.8 running under Win98 with a Canoscan FS2710. > > llc> When using all default settings, when I preview or use a > full scan, the > llc> images come out black. > > I got the same picture with LS-30. Extremely dark and low > contrast scans for > Kodak RC 400. With 2.5 brightness I ended up with low saturated > low contrast > reddish scans. >
RE: filmscanners: orange mask
I don't believe the processing of the film has any effect on the orange mask, unless there is something horrendously wrong with the processing. -Original Message- From: Raphael Bustin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:50 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: orange mask Problem is that the color characteristics of the orange mask vary -- from one film lot to another, and in particular, as a function of the processing of the film. rafe b.
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan problems
llc> I'm having some trouble with scanning negatives in the lastest Vuescan llc> releases, 6.47 and 6.4.8 running under Win98 with a Canoscan FS2710. llc> When using all default settings, when I preview or use a full scan, the llc> images come out black. I got the same picture with LS-30. Extremely dark and low contrast scans for Kodak RC 400. With 2.5 brightness I ended up with low saturated low contrast reddish scans. llc> Slide scanning in 6.4.8 llc> works fine as well. Here Velvia scans comes out dark. 1.3-1.5 brightness fixes it but only if 'White balance' is turned off. With 'White balance' I get light but ugly green-cyan color shift and loose highlight details and overall saturation. -- Best regards, Alexander
Re: filmscanners: Fw: Color Profiles for Printers was scanners
Robert writes ... > Does any scanner really output a gamut wider than sRGB? ( exclude high end > PMT Drum scanners) ... a good question ... Because converting from a small gamut color space to a larger gamut yields very little gain, and because converting a "full" wider gamut to smaller does lose color information (clips the gamut), you can do the following experiment with your scanner software (if it outputs to different profiles ... e.g., Vuescan). It is only a qualitative experiment and I haven't yet figured out how to make it quantitative unless I have a reference "wide gamut slide" and expensive profiling software ... but for answering the above question, you at least have to have a slide (or negative) with "gamut problem" colors (e.g., dark saturated blues (cobalt blue), bright saturated yellows). The experiment goes something like this ... you scan an image into a wide gamut color space (save it) and then convert it to a narrower color space. Now convert it back to the larger color space and subtract it from the saved original. What you see needs to be interpreted with some caveats. For example, the conversion process itself will create differences (especially if you converted 8bits), so you need accept some subtle artifacts of the process. The other caveats may need to be ironed out amongst us. However, my thinking is ... (1) if the subtraction shows significant differences, especially in areas of "gamut problem" colors, then the wider gamut suffered the conversion process and your scanner has a larger gamut than the smaller ... (2) one the other hand, if the difference is very small then the wide gamut color space was larger than the scanner's gamut, and was at least as large as the smaller. You should try a similar experiment with a different pair of color spaces. When you finally realize very subtle differences, then you can assume your scanner's gamut is now snug within the larger of the two. Before you do this with your scanner ... just to get a feeling for the test and what to expect, try the experiment with a manufacted test image ... e.g., a 360 degree hue gradient. For 8bit p-to-p conversions you should see the artifacts of the conversion process ... on the other hand, with 16bit conversions, with dithering turned on (available with PS6 only), the dithering should hide artifacts. I did the test with my LS-2000 and a Q60 slide and several Reala negatives. I definitely saw areas where the wide gamut suffered the conversion ... and I concluded my scans were snug within AdobeRGB, BruceRGB and ColormatchRGB, but definitely larger than sRGB. Because I do not have a reference "gamut problem" color slide, and I take no chances, and all of my highbit scans are archived in ProphotoRGB, and my preferred 8bit working color space is AdobeRGB. shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan 6.4.8 problems with Canoscan FS2710 - Mac
Richard wrote: >I just downloaded Vuescan 6.4.8 and cannot understand why I am getting what >looks like a raw scan even though I have all the setting correct for >negative film >My scanner is a Canoscan FS2710 and I am Mac based running OS9 >Anyone else having problems? Yes, problems here also on the FS2710 with Windows and colour neg. scans. Slides look ok. Colin Maddock .
