MattKing
Moderator
Again, I don't disagree.
I do wonder, however, if the background and/or the top are indeed truly grey.
Or if you prefer, gray
. Even though the OP is from Canada. 
Avoiding Colour Crossover with C-41 + Jobo
-
A
- Thread starter Kuby
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy WTB: Toyo Field 45CF
- Started by Jessxi
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera
- Started by Barlow
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera with 4x5 Back
- Started by Barlow
-
Free 3 kits of kodak flexicolor developer, Free in Portland Oregon
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale Horseman 6x12 roll film back
- Started by OlliJ
Forum statistics
Again, I don't disagree.
I do wonder, however, if the background and/or the top are indeed truly grey.
Or if you prefer, gray
. Even though the OP is from Canada. 
One serious problem is with dyes used in clothes or furniture fabrics. Films tend to "miss" the color when compared to the human eye. The films are sensitized to 3 rather separate regions of the spectrum, but the human eye has overlapping sensitivities. So, film often simply cannot duplicate the eye.
I'm not saying that this is the case, but it might be.
PE
I'm not saying that this is the case, but it might be.
PE
Hopefully if or when the OP reads the rest of the thread it will become clear that there is not an intrinsic flaw/problem with C41 as a process.
pentaxuser
pentaxuser
MattKing
Moderator
I'm guessing that the OP, like many others, considers it to be a "flaw" that one cannot visually check the colour of a C41 negative.
I'm always intrigued when people blame that "flaw" on the orange mask. I guess they feel that they can invert colours in their head.
I'm always intrigued when people blame that "flaw" on the orange mask. I guess they feel that they can invert colours in their head.
Hmmm, I can Matt! I've had no problem with that.
PE
PE
MattKing
Moderator
Hmmm, I can Matt! I've had no problem with that.
PE
Then you probably will like this:
No mask!
Also, the contrast is too high.
Hmmm, on second thought that is APUG, as the original is better.
PE
Also, the contrast is too high.
Hmmm, on second thought that is APUG, as the original is better.
PE
MattKing
Moderator
As that was a direct copy from your APUG/PHOTRIO avatar, inverted in software, it doesn't surprise me that the original is better!
Dupes of a positive are severely compressed in tone scale. This was not a good image to start with and it was digitized for use here as an Avatar. So, you had crap to start with Matt. Sorry.
PE
PE
And now I'm old, fat and ugly!
First, I think you have a very pleasing image and the slight color cast is easily fixed. You'd have a real problem if you had a troublesome negative but you don't. It just appears that there is a blue cast including her skin tone.
I used Lightroom to move the hue of the sweater and background a bit and removed some of the cast from her face. Here is a comparison.
I used Lightroom to move the hue of the sweater and background a bit and removed some of the cast from her face. Here is a comparison.
OP
OP
Hey all. I want to first apologize for the extreme delay in responding to this. I saw the flurry of replies, and at the time that I posted this I also became swamped with work, and totally put this on the backburner.
Second, I want to thank everyone for their input. And as an experiment that I thought you might all find interesting, I have made a multitude of scans that exemplify the different ways in which this image can be produced using the flexcolor software supplied by hasselblad.
First, after scanning as a raw file (3f file), I simply hit auto, which seems to colour balance by finding 18% grey in the photo, as well as finding the white and black points.
Second, while leaving the white and black points alone, I neutralized by finding grey on her shoulder.
Third, I neutralized by finding grey on the backdrop (which is a relatively dark grey).
Fourth I neutralized on her left eye.
And finally I neutralized on her right eye.
It seems to me that the "auto" interpretation of the image is the most accurate, colour wise. There is still quite a lot of cyan in the shadows, and this to me is the concern that caused me to make this post in the first place. Neutralizing on her right eye is also pleasing to me, as it bathes the photo in cool tones.
What I should have articulated in the initial post is that I had added an S curve, using the curves software in flexcolor, which I realize now produces colour changes that are interesting and creative, but not necessarily "accurate". Most notably, it tends to make the darks in the image much cooler (more cyan/blue), which disturbs the accuracy of the color balance in the softwares default interpretation. Since I had this issue to begin with, adding an S curve compounds the problem.
This all being said, removing the cyan is doable in photoshop, and to some degree also in the flexcolor software. But is it desireable? That is the real question.
Ultimately what I have come to terms with is the fact that colour, with regards to negative film based photography, can be harnessed using two different approaches: 1) accuracy, and 2) pleasantry. What I mean by this is that you can try to attain accurate colours, or you can try to attain colours that please the eye. These two things may in fact coincide, but it is not necessarily true. For me, this is an explanation that remedies the "problem" and offers a way to move forward with colour work that, from a philosophical standpoint, I can be satisfied.
What do you all think? Any and all thoughts are welcome
Second, I want to thank everyone for their input. And as an experiment that I thought you might all find interesting, I have made a multitude of scans that exemplify the different ways in which this image can be produced using the flexcolor software supplied by hasselblad.
First, after scanning as a raw file (3f file), I simply hit auto, which seems to colour balance by finding 18% grey in the photo, as well as finding the white and black points.
Second, while leaving the white and black points alone, I neutralized by finding grey on her shoulder.
Third, I neutralized by finding grey on the backdrop (which is a relatively dark grey).
Fourth I neutralized on her left eye.
And finally I neutralized on her right eye.
It seems to me that the "auto" interpretation of the image is the most accurate, colour wise. There is still quite a lot of cyan in the shadows, and this to me is the concern that caused me to make this post in the first place. Neutralizing on her right eye is also pleasing to me, as it bathes the photo in cool tones.
What I should have articulated in the initial post is that I had added an S curve, using the curves software in flexcolor, which I realize now produces colour changes that are interesting and creative, but not necessarily "accurate". Most notably, it tends to make the darks in the image much cooler (more cyan/blue), which disturbs the accuracy of the color balance in the softwares default interpretation. Since I had this issue to begin with, adding an S curve compounds the problem.
This all being said, removing the cyan is doable in photoshop, and to some degree also in the flexcolor software. But is it desireable? That is the real question.
Ultimately what I have come to terms with is the fact that colour, with regards to negative film based photography, can be harnessed using two different approaches: 1) accuracy, and 2) pleasantry. What I mean by this is that you can try to attain accurate colours, or you can try to attain colours that please the eye. These two things may in fact coincide, but it is not necessarily true. For me, this is an explanation that remedies the "problem" and offers a way to move forward with colour work that, from a philosophical standpoint, I can be satisfied.
What do you all think? Any and all thoughts are welcome
Attachments
Last edited:
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |