Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 8:23 PM ALSO ... Ed informs me no transformation takes place at all if the color space "device RGB" is chosen. Michael, What do you mean by this? Is "device RGB" not VS RGB (PCD color space), but the raw scanner/film RGB? Regards, Mark
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
"Mark Ligtenberg" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you mean by this? Is "device RGB" not VS RGB (PCD color space), but the raw scanner/film RGB? AIUI, yes. :) I have yet to try this option however... Rob
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Mark writes ... From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 8:23 PM ALSO ... Ed informs me no transformation takes place at all if the color space "device RGB" is chosen. What do you mean by this? Is "device RGB" not VS RGB (PCD color space), but the raw scanner/film RGB? Yes ... shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 5:22 PM Mark writes ... From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 8:23 PM ALSO ... Ed informs me no transformation takes place at all if the color space "device RGB" is chosen. What do you mean by this? Is "device RGB" not VS RGB (PCD color space), but the raw scanner/film RGB? Yes ... shAf :o) Michael, Thanks to you, we now know for sure, that "device RGB" =raw scanner/film RGB! Regards, Mark
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 08:35:10 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: That being said, and altho I trust Ed, I know little about PCD RGB, and there seems to be little available regarding comparisons with the common working spaces (if comparisons can be made ... some of what I've found would imply apples and oranges). I will assume, until I realize otherwise, VS's internal space is sufficient for 1 2. T'was discussed a while back, and Ed was vehement that this was the case. No without some dissent ISTR. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Richard, From my reading of info on Vuescan, it does indeed use the PCD colorspace, and I don't think any violation of anything is occurring. The color space of PCD could easily include all of the film types you speak of, regardless of a bias (filter) used during the scanning process. Further, Kodak does use a universal "filter" for many of the films, and often labs only use that filter/calibration, unless specifically asked otherwise. But these do not determine color space, they determine interpretation of the color values within the image. Regarding ownership of the PCD color space, it would be a bit like saying Kodak owns the rights to the proper calibration to filter out the dye base colors on one of their print films, or better yet, that they own the color red, for instance. Since all color spaces are a subset of white light, maybe I'll patent white light and claim ownership of all of them. You are wrong about the Kodak Scanner situation as well (they can be bought outright), and about access to programs that write to PCD format. What is proprietary is not the scanning process, but the software and algorithms which create the file packet and the disk formatting. Art
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Tony writes ... On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 21:01:09 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: ... so Ektaspace is an easily accepted compromise. Ektaspace is also respected for its editabilty, and its wide gamut is very suitable for highbit editing. Its gamut is also sufficiently wide for archiving. Actually I think you're spot on here, and the space used *is* Ektaspace - at least according to my overcrowded memory of previous discussions. ... I'm not inclined to believe it *is* Ektaspace ... leastwise, I claimed it was "most like" ektaspace, but I did see some differences ... essentially spot on, but reds were perceivably slightly different. I am rather inclined to believe it *is* PCD RGB, that is, Bruce Fraser has implied the two color spaces are very much alike. Something else has just occurred to me. My "test" was based on a fresh installation of VS7 while my LS-2000 is now put away. That is, my test was based on a previously acquired "raw" scan 64bit TIFF, and VS7 had no way of knowing which scanner scanned it(???!!!) This shouldn't change my conclusions regarding the color capacity of VS RGB, but it does raise the question as to WHEN the scanner characterization's transform is applied and when VS RGB enters the picture (so to speak). Is the "scanned" RGB data truely "raw"? Does the transform take place only if "device=scanner"? ... and no transform takes place if "device=disk"?? There being no difference for selecting "scanner" versus "disk" would only be true if the scanner transform (scanner_RGB=VS_RGB) were applied to the "raw" data. Maybe it is, but I was under a different impression. This is where I miss Ed on this forum :-( shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
shAf previously writes ... Something else has just occurred to me. My "test" was based on a fresh installation of VS7 while my LS-2000 is now put away. That is, my test was based on a previously acquired "raw" scan 64bit TIFF, and VS7 had no way of knowing which scanner scanned it. WRONG!!! I could have selected my scanner from a list for 'device mode'. I still don't think this will change my conclusions, but it may change something with regard to using the "device" space I have for my LS-2000. ALSO ... Ed informs me no transformation takes place at all if the color space "device RGB" is chosen. Both of these developments together ^may^ change my conclusions. ... stay tuned ... shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
- Original Message - From: Bob Shomler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 3:28 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" Vuescan has an option to tag files with the selected color space profile (except for Device RGB, which according to the help file "doesn't embed any ICC profile into the TIFF or JPEG files..."). The embedded profile is recognized by Photoshop (at least it is in my config). ProPhoto RGB is one of the color spaces Vuescan offers for file output. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm What color space does Photoshop (6) open a file tagged ProPhoto RGB into? Bob Wright
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
- Original Message - From: Bob Shomler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 3:28 PM Subject: RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" Vuescan has an option to tag files with the selected color space profile (except for Device RGB, which according to the help file "doesn't embed any ICC profile into the TIFF or JPEG files..."). The embedded profile is recognized by Photoshop (at least it is in my config). ProPhoto RGB is one of the color spaces Vuescan offers for file output. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm What color space does Photoshop (6) open a file tagged ProPhoto RGB into? ProPhotoRGB. You have the choice to 1) preserve the tag: leave it alone, as is, 2) convert it to working space, 3) convert to another space. You can set the default to any of above. Most people set it to 1. Bob Wright
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
What color space does Photoshop (6) open a file tagged ProPhoto RGB into? Depends on the Photoshop 6 Color Settings [Edit Color Settings]. It should act as set for a profile mismatch. If you have 'ask when opening' checked for profile mismatches it should present a dialog box on opening the file. Page 128-129 in the PS6 User Guide lists what PS will do for various color management settings. Ian Lyons has written a good essay on PS6 color. See: http://www.computer-darkroom.com/photoshop_6/ps6_1.htm Or skip ahead to near the end of page 5 of 10 where this specific topic is discussed http://www.computer-darkroom.com/photoshop_6/ps6_5.htm. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
My point was that I don't find a ProPhoto RGB profile in the Photoshop dialog. I guess I'll just have to try it. Bob Wright - Original Message - From: Bob Shomler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 3:03 PM Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" What color space does Photoshop (6) open a file tagged ProPhoto RGB into? Depends on the Photoshop 6 Color Settings [Edit Color Settings]. It should act as set for a profile mismatch. If you have 'ask when opening' checked for profile mismatches it should present a dialog box on opening the file. Page 128-129 in the PS6 User Guide lists what PS will do for various color management settings. Ian Lyons has written a good essay on PS6 color. See: http://www.computer-darkroom.com/photoshop_6/ps6_1.htm Or skip ahead to near the end of page 5 of 10 where this specific topic is discussed http://www.computer-darkroom.com/photoshop_6/ps6_5.htm. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
"shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rob writes ...
Er, doesn't PS 5.5 allow you to say what profile the
image is coming from when the image is untagged?
Yes ... but it seems to me that list of profiles is particular to
working spaces, excluding device profiles ... or maybe I'm wrong. If
so, then it should work for PS5 as well.
I just checked and it lists all the loaded profiles - all the PS ones and
all the ICM ones which are in the system.
Does "Device RGB" invert a negative, or is the output
still raw and without the mask removed?
Altho I haven't had a chance to play with this option, that would
seem to be it's purpose ... so you can fully process ("crop") and
leave the RGB data in the color space it was scanned into.
I'll have to give this a try - and open it in PS using the LS30's own
profile...
Rob
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 18:39:18 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I meant it only in the context of what you seemed to imply ... VS offering only trismuthus matrix tranformations. It is apparently something quite rigorous to impliment and tranform 3-dimensional LUT-type device profiles. I believe Ed would have to license the Adobe or Kodak rendering engines to offer this. Yes, I think you're correct, which is why he avoids a LUT I daresay. I can't take this discussion much further as I'm not sufficiently au fait with what Ed does or claims, or the more esoteric aspects of ICC derivation. As you noted I expect a lot for $40 ... but not really ... I only want an understanding of Ed's implimentations, and strive for clearing up any confusions. For example ... to ask for AdobeRGB from VS, and then see the image in VS's window is terribly confusing ... that is, until you understand why. Well, yes, it is if it matters to you that the window should bear much relation to what eventually emerges in PS. There's evidently scope for handling things better there, and AFAIK VS makes no attempt at accurate, ICM display. Personally this doesn't matter one bit to me, as I use VS only to acquire a 16bit scan I can deal with in PS - but if you want corrected, 8 bit scans, yes, it's a problem. I think that we have to bear in mind where it started from, as a standalone scanning prog for the Photosmart only, pre ICM. There's a good case for a rewrite as a PS plugin, and another good case for proper ICM implementation, but that would probably lock out a majority of users who cannot afford the level of expense involved in this degree of obsessive behaviour. This might be a plea for a VS Pro version, if the market is really there. But it may well not be. I think if you add up the costs of mid-high prosumer scanning and dig imaging, it is truly scary. I expect most people who have and use PS have thrown $3-10,000 at their entire system incl. scanner, s/w, computer, printer. Then there's consumables and endless upgrades. I doubt many people get away with spending less than $2-3000/year, one way and another - and that's on top of cameras, FP, etc. Even if you do this for a living, clients don't want to pay any extra and there's the added problem of ignorance messing up results, which makes them even more reluctant. I have mailed Ed and asked that he consider returning as I think there's some useful VS-related stuff happening here now. And I intend stamping my feet a bit harder WRT OT discussions. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Tony writes ... The raw scan is in an unspecified device space, scanner RGB. Ed's transform, applied during the production of the Crop file, munges that against his characterisation and the result is a scan with altered data values within Vuescan's working space (which I previously said I thought was maybe sRGB, but as has been pointed out it ain't, it's Kodak's PCD space - ... That's more comforting. For taking a raw scan, from any scanner, and into the variety of color spaces Vuescan offers, I assume Ed is assuming (1) a specific scanner may have the potential for delivering a wide gamut of color ... (2) a transform from that gamut to any internal color space can squash that gamut, and you'll never get it back. That being said, and altho I trust Ed, I know little about PCD RGB, and there seems to be little available regarding comparisons with the common working spaces (if comparisons can be made ... some of what I've found would imply apples and oranges). I will assume, until I realize otherwise, VS's internal space is sufficient for 1 2. shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
There is a lot that doesn't add up - - regarding PCD "space", and VS using PhotoCD "space". 1. You will note that you cannot do a profile conversion (profile to profile) in Photoshop to a PhotoCD (space) profile, of which I have about 8 of them in my ColorSync folder. 2. PhotoCD format - - and their ICC profiles ARE proprietary, and any use thereof would require a license. 3. If you examine each PhotoCD ICC profile, you will see a number of CLUT listing, and the sources are labeled "secret". That word. Each 16 bit profile has about 8 listings, all "secret" - - or proprietary. This is NOT the case if you examine Kodak's ProPhotoRGB space - for example. 4. You can open a PhotoCD - or a PictureCD using Kodak's embedded profiles, or can use one of the other Kodak CD profiles in your ICC profile bank, but you cannot save to PhotoCD, meaning you cannot embed (or format) Kodak's space. 5. If VS uses PhotoCD, what is he (Ed) using for tables, if the CLUTS are proprietary? And anyway, what good does it do in this case? I really wonder if this is fact that he is "assuming a space", and he thinks that space looks like a PhotoCD space. In an (off-list) correspondence with me Ed championed sRGB The sRGB profile consists of about 16 data points. That's it. A synthetic space meant for video and graphics on the web. 6. The scanner has its own RGB color response, usually evidenced by its profile. The profile merely maps the scanner's RGB data in a way consistent with the scanner capabilities, and therefore does not try to "remap" into a space either smaller or larger, or distorted, from the scanner response. Therefore what you get in Photoshop is "undistorted" RGB values, as delivered by the scanner. Most modern scanners have RGB responses far in excess of the media they scan, including E6, or Ektachrome, the media generally acknowledged to have the widest color gamut. In fact, the Nikon LS1000 has a gamut,or color response that well exceeds Ekta Space; the Imacon is way, way out there. Anyway, the scanner profile neither adds or subtracts from its intrinsic gamut. 7. If a profile is not used by VS, you have what is called "raw data", meaning as is, and not mapped. That is, if Ed isn't "remapping" in the background that you don't know about. And, even if the scanner profile is applied, that RGB will not budge from the untagged values. This is because the profile merely maps out what the scanner is doing in the first place. 8. All Kodak PhotoCD profiles exhibit very unusual gamut profiles, in either L.a.b., Yxy, or XYZ space. The are all complex. The only thing you can say is that they universally fit within Kodak ProPhotoRGB space. I don't know why Ed would even consider these spaces - - unless for PR reasons. 9. If VS is using some sort of "space" which alters the RGB values, and then doesn't "tag" the resulting image - you never know how much distortion has been introduced from "real" values. The image comes to you as untagged. If you apply a profile in VS, then the image should come to you as "Tagged", and you should see that (ICC profile) in Photoshop. Without this requirement, or data trail, you are in never never land regarding the fidelity of the original image. You might be bridging into touchy, unsafe waters by forcing out clarity on this issue - - Ed has a useful product to many on this list. And a good product to many. Better not lift the lid too much to look underneath. Tony writes ... The raw scan is in an unspecified device space, scanner RGB. Ed's transform, applied during the production of the Crop file, munges that against his characterisation and the result is a scan with altered data values within Vuescan's working space (which I previously said I thought was maybe sRGB, but as has been pointed out it ain't, it's Kodak's PCD space - ... That's more comforting. For taking a raw scan, from any scanner, and into the variety of color spaces Vuescan offers, I assume Ed is assuming (1) a specific scanner may have the potential for delivering a wide gamut of color ... (2) a transform from that gamut to any internal color space can squash that gamut, and you'll never get it back. That being said, and altho I trust Ed, I know little about PCD RGB, and there seems to be little available regarding comparisons with the common working spaces (if comparisons can be made ... some of what I've found would imply apples and oranges). I will assume, until I realize otherwise, VS's internal space is sufficient for 1 2. shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Richard writes ... There is a lot that doesn't add up - - regarding PCD "space", and VS using PhotoCD "space". 1. You will note that you cannot do a profile conversion (profile to profile) in Photoshop ... 2. PhotoCD format - - and their ICC profiles ARE proprietary, ... 3. If you examine each PhotoCD ICC profile, you will see a number of CLUT listing, and the sources are labeled "secret". That word. ... 4. You can open a PhotoCD - ... you cannot embed (or format) Kodak's space. Probably the reason I found so little info regarding the color capacity of PhotoCD space when I visited Kodak this morning ... plent of info, yes ... but nothing to relate it in terms we use in the normal context of profiles. Still, the transforms were easily downloaded, and I didn't have to sign or accept anything. Presumably Ed knows what he's doing, has permission, and simply anything remotely associated with embedding PCD RGB. 5. If VS uses PhotoCD, what is he (Ed) using for tables, if the CLUTS are proprietary? ... In an (off-list) correspondence with me Ed championed sRGB ... I cannot imagine he is using sRGB as an intermediate color space ... it would then make any sense to offer other color spaces as sRGB is the smallest. Someone will simply have to ask him. 6. The scanner has its own RGB color response, ... Most modernscanners have RGB responses far in excess of the media they scan, ... ... In fact, the Nikon LS1000 has a gamut,or color response that well exceeds Ekta Space; ... Interesting! PS6 allows for rough comparisons of the LUT-type profiles included with the LS-2000. "Nikon_wide" was only a bit bigger than Ektaspace (if you can believe the trismusthus intercept PS6 calculates being a fair comparison). According to Bruce Fraser, PCD RGB isn't much larger either, but definitely large enough to not clip scanner space (debatably), and to offer lossless conversions to most working spaces (the exception being ProPhoto, which according to Bruce is quite a bit larger than PCD RGB) 7. ... 8. All Kodak PhotoCD profiles exhibit very unusual gamut profiles, in either L.a.b., Yxy, or XYZ space. The are all complex. ... I don't know why Ed would even consider these spaces - - unless for PR reasons. When you say "all the PCD profiles", wouldn't Ed simply be using the most appropriate one. And, wouldn't this one offer a standard model for mathematically converting to from??? 9. If VS is using some sort of "space" which alters the RGB values, and then doesn't "tag" the resulting image - you never know how much distortion has been introduced from "real" values. After looking into it only a little bit, I came away believing PCD RGB is sufficiently large and well defined to be used as an intermediate space. Vuescan does tag the images it exports in a variety of working spaces (including ProPhoto and Ektaspace), the only offering it doesn't tag is "device RGB" ... and it should be easy to see if it is anything remotely resembling sRGB. I'm quite curious ... I would ask VS for an sRGB image, and Ektaspace image, and the "device RGB" image. Depending on which resembled which, as you assigned the working space to dRGB with PS6, it should be obvious. shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
8. All Kodak PhotoCD profiles exhibit very unusual gamut profiles, in either L.a.b., Yxy, or XYZ space. The are all complex. The only thing you can say is that they universally fit within Kodak ProPhotoRGB space. I don't know why Ed would even consider these spaces - - unless for PR reasons. I recall a long time back he said he was deriving some part of his film type correction curves or matrix data from film type data from Kodak for PhotoCDs. 9. If VS is using some sort of "space" which alters the RGB values, and then doesn't "tag" the resulting image - you never know how much distortion has been introduced from "real" values. The image comes to you as untagged. If you apply a profile in VS, then the image should come to you as "Tagged", and you should see that (ICC profile) in Photoshop. Without this requirement, or data trail, you are in never never land regarding the fidelity of the original image. Vuescan has an option to tag files with the selected color space profile (except for Device RGB, which according to the help file "doesn't embed any ICC profile into the TIFF or JPEG files..."). The embedded profile is recognized by Photoshop (at least it is in my config). ProPhoto RGB is one of the color spaces Vuescan offers for file output. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
I guess you will have to ask him exactly what he is using. The discussion was about PhotoCD embedded profiles. Not standard spaces, such as AdobeRGB. The "Transforms" you can download from Kodak - ASFICT are profiles, used to open files formatted in PhotoCD format. For opening files only. But you cannot open an image which is tagged in ColorMatchRGB, or AdobeRGB (say - scanned with VS and selecting one of these spaces), and then convert the *embedded* profile to PhotoCD profile, and then save to PhotoCD format. Even PictureCD. Such that when you open the file again, the profile (as denoted in Photoshop window - at bottom) will say "pcdcnycc"," pcdekycc", "pcd4050e", ", pcd4050k", or about 4 others that start with "pcd-". These are the Kodak PhotoCD profiles that are invoked when you open a PhotoCD file on a disk provided by a licensed service provider. These files, by definition of the PhotoCD format, come in at least six resolutions, depending on whether or not the file is "Pro", "Master", "Picture" - - . But at no time does the format permit only one saved file - as was implied by another poster. And, you can't even do this unless you are licensed, and are provided authoring software included in the license from Kodak. As mentioned before, the CLUT definitions are proprietary. And, you can't open a file into "photoCD space", You cannot load any of the profiles mentioned above as a working "space". If Ed is "doing this" - somehow - he is not doing this without Kodak's permission, unless he is licensed and has obtained proprietary authoring software. But even then, Kodak would take a dim view of anybody mucking around with their technology, that they invested so heavily into. They would have to insist that all licensees conform to standards agreed upon in the licence contract. I recall a long time back he said he was deriving some part of his film type correction curves or matrix data from film type data from Kodak for PhotoCDs. 9. If VS is using some sort of "space" which alters the RGB values, and then doesn't "tag" the resulting image - you never know how much distortion has been introduced from "real" values. The image comes to you as untagged. If you apply a profile in VS, then the image should come to you as "Tagged", and you should see that (ICC profile) in Photoshop. Without this requirement, or data trail, you are in never never land regarding the fidelity of the original image. Vuescan has an option to tag files with the selected color space profile (except for Device RGB, which according to the help file "doesn't embed any ICC profile into the TIFF or JPEG files..."). The embedded profile is recognized by Photoshop (at least it is in my config). ProPhoto RGB is one of the color spaces Vuescan offers for file output. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
When you say "all the PCD profiles", wouldn't Ed simply be using the most appropriate one. And, wouldn't this one offer a standard model for mathematically converting to from??? They are all different: pcd4050e.pf for E6 pcd4050k.pf for K-14 pcdcnycc.pf for color negative pcdekycc.pf for universal E6 pcdkoycc.pf for universal K-14 I can't tell you which one is used where. I have seen both the "pcd4050e and k" come up. All are Kodak device profiles, and have the ".pf" extension. And, all of them contain text detailing their *Copyright* information. The PhotoCD extension, when opening a PhotoCD file uses the trademark notation, such as IMG0001.PCD . note the "" after the PCD extension. 9. If VS is using some sort of "space" which alters the RGB values, and then doesn't "tag" the resulting image - you never know how much distortion has been introduced from "real" values. After looking into it only a little bit, I came away believing PCD RGB is sufficiently large and well defined to be used as an intermediate space. Vuescan does tag the images it exports in a variety of working spaces (including ProPhoto and Ektaspace), the only offering it doesn't tag is "device RGB" ... and it should be easy to see if it is anything remotely resembling sRGB. I'm quite curious ... I would ask VS for an sRGB image, and Ektaspace image, and the "device RGB" image. Depending on which resembled which, as you assigned the working space to dRGB with PS6, it should be obvious. Can't use PCD as a space. It is all device specific, the devices being Kodak's proprietary authoring scanners, such as the "Filmscanner 200", a 16 bit scanner, probably leased (but not owned) by the service provider and (probably) included with the license contract. shAf :o) Yes it is large. It will encompass Ekta Space (almost), which is the definition of E6 Ektachrome media, and thus E6 gamut.
Vuescan film characteristic transforms was RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Richard wrote: And, you can't open a file into "photoCD space", You cannot load any of the profiles mentioned above as a working "space". If Ed is "doing this" - somehow - he is not doing this without Kodak's permission, unless he is licensed and has obtained proprietary authoring software. Just to try to keep this a little clearer - Ed has used the freely available data which Kodak provide to define the characteristics of the various films. This film characteristic data is also used by Kodak in their PhotoCD workstations. I am sure that Ed is not doing anything which requires Kodak's permission, nor AFAIK is he truly doing anything which is directly to do with Kodak's proprietary Photo CD technology. Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Richard writes ... Yes it is large. It will encompass Ekta Space (almost), which is the definition of E6 Ektachrome media, and thus E6 gamut. I'm posting th results of my little test regarding the capacity of Vuescan's gamut, "device RGB" (... whatever it is ...) First ... some prelims ... I scanned an image into sRGB space 1st just for getting the colors approximately correct on my gamma=2.2 monitor ... and then loaded it into Photoshop 6. Next ... I scanned another image, without changing anything, into a wide gamut space, ProphotoRGB (gamma=1.8) ... and loaded it into Photoshop. Both of these "appear" identical, so there is nothing wrong with my monitor compensation. Second ... I scan having chosen "device RGB" which doesn't embed any profile, but is supposed to be Vuescan's color space. I can choose to "assign" any profile to it, and the profile which makes it appear like the others will give us an idea of "Vuescan RGB" color space. If I assign a profile and it appears over-saturated, then VS RGB has a smaller gamut than what I assigned, and vice versa if it appears under-saturated. The result is VS RGB is somewhere inbetween ProPhotoRGB and sRGB, and most like EktaspaceRGB. Unfortunately, VS RGB is a smaller gamut than what Nikon believes belongs to the LS-2000 ... if I assign "Nikon_wide" the over-saturation is obvious. Fortunately, and as Richard stated before (at least with respect to Nikons), the scanner's gamut is designed to exceed that of the media ... so Ektaspace is an easily accepted compromise. Ektaspace is also respected for its editabilty, and its wide gamut is very suitable for highbit editing. Its gamut is also sufficiently wide for archiving. The downside of VS RGB, besides being smaller than some scanners' device spaces, is that it is significantly smaller than "Adobe wide gamut" and ProPhotoRGB. That is, you get nothing by choosing these two color space options ... unless you like a lot of headroom for serious Photoshop adjustments ... but the "beyond gamut" results of such adjustments cannot be seen in monitor space, so what's the use(?) The good news is VS RGB is sufficiently large. No one should complain for lack of gamut ... no matter what the application post scan. It is also sufficiently large for some serious and creative highbit adjustments. On the other hand, if Ed wanted to extend Vuescan's market into professional work, he might want to consider a different internal color space for Vuescan 'Pro'. my US$0.02
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:15:35 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: but while we all recognize with kudos the advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its weakness and lack of scanner characterization. Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. He hasn't hived the matrix off into a profile as he doesn't want competitors nicking it, at least that is what he has said. I don't find any problem with this in practice - what emerges from Vuescan is tagged as being in a selected colour space, and it is, as the image data has been run through the transform and then into the tagged output space. It is just that how it got to be there cannot be reverse-engineered without delving into his code. The VS workflow goes - raw scan (scan+n.tif, if you opt to write it to disk) - apply hardcoded scanner transform - apply selected output profile = output file Crop_n.tif, tagged with output profile AFAICS you only *need* the scanner profile if you want to work with the first, raw scan. And you'd only want to do that if you had some means of characterising your own, personal scanner and making your own superior profile for it. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Filmscanners" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 10:22 PM Has anyone figured out how to use this color space option?? VS's help file implies the resulting color space will be that of the "device", BUT the profile is not embedded. How would you convert to a Photoshop editing work space if the 'from' device space is not known or embedded?? I was hoping this option would have allowed me to select an actual ICM which came with the scanner, or had been empirically created. It would seem to be the best color space for archiving the original scan. Actually, the Vuescan 'raw' scan is always the best choice for archiving ... but not necessarily for everyone. The use of this option is a mystery. I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. In my case Minolta Dual ll. Maybe it is not better than what VS can, but at least you can try it and for some it is better. Don't make it a mystery :) Regards, Mark
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 5:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:15:35 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: but while we all recognize with kudos the advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its weakness and lack of scanner characterization. Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. ... I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. I need to play with this option ... I simply opened VS yesterday to inspect the help file and look and feel of the v.7 GUI. If I catch the gist of current users of this option, I may well end up in the color space I want by "assigning" the 3-D LUT profile upon opening ... altho it would have been better to go straight to it via a "color space = 'none'" option so I could take advantage of IR cleaning. I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... still, I rather know for sure because I'm otherwise inadequately evaluating how well it works in monitor space (as it is presented in Photoshop). I'll see if he hasn't responded to a similar query at the comp.periphs.scanners newsgroup. (... nope ...) shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
shAF wrote: I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... "Nearly imperceivable effects" are a large part of what makes a picture "excellent" instead of "good." A little more subtle than the difference between "lightning" and "a lightning bug," but you all get the picture. Best regards--LRA --- FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Mark wrote: I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Vuescan uses a hard-coded tristimulus transform derived from empirical testing of each scanner supported, though this is presumably not the case for scanners which happen to be supported just 'cos they understand SCSI commands for another model. ... I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. The following may be found in the vuescan help file - Introduction: VueScan uses color correction tables which have been derived from a Kodak Q60 calibration slide and which produce colors accurate to better than 1%. The default color primaries and white point are the same as used by the Kodak PhotoCD system - Rec. 709 primaries with a D65 white point. And from a post from Ed last January: Most scanners return raw data straight from the CCD. Some scanners do color conversion internally. The Epson scanners all (optionally) convert colors to sRGB before returning it to the host computer (this is the mode that VueScan uses). Other scanners (i.e. HP) let you download a 3x3 matrix to do the color transform in the scanner, but I never use this in VueScan. To interact with Ed in a public forum -- from the Vuescan web page: If you'd like to exchange tips with other people using a wide range of different scanners, try the comp.periphs.scanners newsgroup. -- Bob Shomler http://www.shomler.com/gallery.htm
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Rob writes ... Mark wrote: I think it is a nice option. Because you are able to use the scannerprofiles (neg. and trans.) that came with your scannersoftware when you bought the scanner. How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Presumably ... the color space option, "device RGB", is intended for this ... and you would also need Photoshop 6 ... for either (1) assigning the scanner profile of choice ... or (2) opening the scanned image into the device space. Only PS6 allows a device space to be the working space (but who would want to), or the ability for "assigning" an image to a color space. One still nagging question I still have about the "device RGB" option is two differing opinions on how it works. One post, from the user who claimed to have asked for it, claims no transformation takes place and therefore the RGB space is inherently the scanner space. This is the way it should work ... and you would simply assign the scanner profile once it is in Photoshop. However ... Tony seems to be under the impression, for those scanners which have been chracterized, Vuescan will transform the scanned RGB data into "device RGB". (Tony ... correct me if I'm wrong ... I think this is what your 'step-by-step' Vuescan method implied. This implimentation of "device RGB" makes me itchy, because while it is in Ed's evalutated "device RGB" space, it is NOT in the same RGB space as implied by a manufacturer supplied, or 3rd party calibration, device color space. To impose (assign) one on top of the other makes me uncomfortable ... I certainly am more comfortable with the scanned image inheriting the device space because nothing was done to it (... not implying the 'raw' scan' because we are still trying to use Vuescan's cropping tools ...) ...) shAf :o)
RE: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:43:54 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I understand Ed being wary ... At one time I was under the impression he was characterizing the scanners Vuescan supported, but you seem to claim some scanners are not characterized. No, part of his adaptation of VS is to characterise the scanner. But there are a few scanners which, whilst not explicitly supported by named modules (=specifically characterised), seem to work anyway because they share SCSI commands with one which is supported. AFAIK this applies only to flatbeds, but whether the characterisation of the supported scanner is a good fit to any of those is a matter of luck. If it works well, it works well. If not, it's unsupported :) For example, did he take the time to chacterize the LS-40, for which he added support in a single day?? I am certain he will have done so, because I've discussed what he does with him at some length off list. He wouldn't claim to support it otherwise. If he offers a color space option which is "implied" to belong to the device, this is important to know. It's not an option but hard coded and different for each supported scanner. Unfortunately this places it beyond experimentation. IWBNI he provided a 'Pro' version at higher cost which allowed you to derive your own characterisations from any film and for your own scanner (either VS-unique code, or ICM), but someone would have to go into business producing suitably toleranced targets on a variety of materials. A can of big fat worms. I need to play with this option ... I simply opened VS yesterday to inspect the help file and look and feel of the v.7 GUI. If I catch the gist of current users of this option, I may well end up in the color space I want by "assigning" the 3-D LUT profile upon opening ... The profile which came with your scanner I presume? Yes, that should work (with a raw scan), but you won't have any access to film characterisations unless the scanner mfr provides different profiles for those, instead of the more common generic neg or pos ones. altho it would have been better to go straight to it via a "color space = 'none'" option so I could take advantage of IR cleaning. I see. You want blood for $40, you do :) I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... Last time someone said that of VS, ISTR Ed took exception and pointed out VS does no more and no less than ICM, except not give you a tag. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio exhibit; + film scanner info comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Tony writes ... On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:43:54 -0800 shAf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I'm harping about imperceivable effects of one implimentation of CM versus another more rigorous ... Last time someone said that of VS, ISTR Ed took exception and pointed out VS does no more and no less than ICM, except not give you a tag. I meant it only in the context of what you seemed to imply ... VS offering only trismuthus matrix tranformations. It is apparently something quite rigorous to impliment and tranform 3-dimensional LUT-type device profiles. I believe Ed would have to license the Adobe or Kodak rendering engines to offer this. As you noted I expect a lot for $40 ... but not really ... I only want an understanding of Ed's implimentations, and strive for clearing up any confusions. For example ... to ask for AdobeRGB from VS, and then see the image in VS's window is terribly confusing ... that is, until you understand why. shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Michael wrote: Rob writes ... How do you use scanner profiles with Vuescan? Presumably ... the color space option, "device RGB", is intended for this ... and you would also need Photoshop 6 ... for either (1) assigning the scanner profile of choice ... or (2) opening the scanned image into the device space. Only PS6 allows a device space to be the working space (but who would want to), or the ability for "assigning" an image to a color space. Er, doesn't PS 5.5 allow you to say what profile the image is coming from when the image is untagged? Does "Device RGB" invert a negative, or is the output still raw and without the mask removed? Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Rob writes ...
Er, doesn't PS 5.5 allow you to say what profile the
image is coming from when the image is untagged?
Yes ... but it seems to me that list of profiles is particular to
working spaces, excluding device profiles ... or maybe I'm wrong. If
so, then it should work for PS5 as well.
Does "Device RGB" invert a negative, or is the output
still raw and without the mask removed?
Altho I haven't had a chance to play with this option, that would
seem to be it's purpose ... so you can fully process ("crop") and
leave the RGB data in the color space it was scanned into.
shAf :o)
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Too bad Ed isn't on the list as he could enlighten us. Dale From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Has anyone figured out how to use this color space option?? VS's help file implies the resulting color space will be that of the "device", BUT the profile is not embedded. How would you convert to a Photoshop editing work space if the 'from' device space is not known or embedded??
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
My understanding is that, though without embedding it, this option uses the scanner profile as selected in your graphics program in transferring the image to the graphics program, and the graphics program would than embed it's default/preferred color space in the image if it embeds such spaces as Photoshop does. I use it as I do not need an embedded profile since I use Corel PhotoPaint. Maris - Original Message - From: "shAf" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Filmscanners" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 2:22 PM Subject: filmscanners: Vuescan: "device RGB" | | Has anyone figured out how to use this color space option?? VS's | help file implies the resulting color space will be that of the | "device", BUT the profile is not embedded. How would you convert to a | Photoshop editing work space if the 'from' device space is not known | or embedded?? | I was hoping this option would have allowed me to select an actual | ICM which came with the scanner, or had been empirically created. It | would seem to be the best color space for archiving the original scan. | Actually, the Vuescan 'raw' scan is always the best choice for | archiving ... but not necessarily for everyone. The use of this | option is a mystery. | | shAf :o) |
Re: filmscanners: Vuescan: device RGB
Goerf writes ... shAf wrote: Has anyone figured out how to use this color space option?? ... I'm the one who has requested for this space. Choosing this device space will disable all color space conversions in Vuescan (like raw) but allows you to perform the light/heavy/medium filtering on it, which is not possible on the raw output. ... I see ... but it is a strange implimentation ... especially when it is in the context of color profiles, leading to possible confusion. If the option were labeled 'none' it would be better. Ed has been not necessily close-mouthed about his implimentation of color spaces, but he hasn't been clear either. I belive he doesn't impliment the characteristics of each scanner he supports. Vuescan can control them, but there is no recognition of the "color" the scanner is capable of. For example, I believe Rob's recent post of colormatchRGB into AdobeRGB seemingly being accurate is an example of this ... that is, it is an work-around interpretation of his scanner's color space into his working space which seems to work. The proper implimentation would be a proper characterization of the scanner's color space into working space. (Rob ... if you are reading this, instead of Colormatch, you might want to try EktaspaceRGB into your working space, which I determined to be very close to the device profile provided by Nikon. Alternatively, you might try the "device RGB" option, and then convert from "%_NKWide_CPS.icm" to your working space when you open the file in Photoshop. I won't claim it will be the subjectively perfect scan you're looking for, but I might suggest it'll cure the overly-saturated reds you're experiencing.) I also admit I need to play with the above suggestion and with VS v.7 ... I am unfortunately in the middle of selling a house and moving across north america ... and it just so happens my scanner has taken a back seat and has been put away ...~sigh~... In any case, I imagine Vuescan will continue to get good marks for controlling the scan acquisition, but VS will also continue to cause confusion in the arena of serious Photoshop users who want to strictly adhere to proper implimentation of device profiles and working color spaces. As you say ... Ed claims this would be a difficult implimemntation ... but while we all recognize with kudos the advantages of VS, we need to also recognize its weakness and lack of scanner characterization. my US$0.02 ... shAf :o)
