Do you scan your negs ......

[Eric Rose]

I was wondering, for best results do you think a "flat" scan as apposed to a scan that looks closest to what we want as an end result is best?

 

[faberryman]

Flat scan. Save manipulation for LR/PS. Isn't that best practices?

 

[Anon Ymous]

Raw scan actually, so flat. I manipulate the image in Photoshop.

 

[Eric Rose]

That's what I thought. I have been doing that but just wondered what others are doing.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Flat. I explain why here:

http://crawfordphotoschool.com/digital/film-scanning-intro.php

 

[removed account4]

I was wondering, for best results do you think a "flat" scan as apposed to a scan that looks closest to what we want as an end result is best?

it depends on what i am scanning. sometimes if i only get once chance i twerk it a little in ES and then heavily manipulate it in PS, but other times if i don't need to worry about it, i "reset" the file's levels to be 0'd out and take it from there...

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Scan it close to the way you want it without losing the ends.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I always adjust the histogram at the scanner so that no clipping occurs. Then I usually dump the red and blue channels.

 

[Pentode]

Scan it close to the way you want it without losing the ends.

This is what I do as well.

 

[Eric Rose]

I scan in 16 bit b&w so I don't think there is any colour channels.

 

[jim10219]

I always adjust the histogram at the scanner so that no clipping occurs. Then I usually dump the red and blue channels.

This is good practice. Scanners, unless it's a dedicated B&W scanner, don't scan in B&W. They convert the raw scan to B&W in software after running a color scan. You might as well take control over that and do it yourself and see if you can do a better job. If not, then doing a B&W scan is fine. I also scan to keep everything in the histogram as far from clipping as possible, then adjust the colors as necessary in software.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I scan in 16 bit b&w so I don't think there is any colour channels.

I scan in 48 bit colour. I use the Epson 750. What scanner are you using, Eric?

 

[awty]

I only scan negs to see whether I have something worth printing. I use a light box and a digital camera for sheet film.
For scanning prints I try to adjust everything on the scanner to best match, then fine tune on computer software.....sometimes I get the tones pretty close, sometimes I dont. Cream especially is difficult to match.

 

[Eric Rose]

I scan in 48 bit colour. I use the Epson 750. What scanner are you using, Eric?

I use the 750 Pro. I tried scanning in 48 bit colour but couldn't see any advantage. Maybe I'm missing something...

 

[jim10219]

I use the 750 Pro. I tried scanning in 48 bit colour but couldn't see any advantage. Maybe I'm missing something...

Scanners scan in RGB. In Photoshop, you can isolate the red, green, and blue channels. Usually, what you do is look to see which one offers the best tonality. The green channel is probably most often used, but you can select any single channel, or combination there of to get the results you like.

 

[Eric Rose]

I can turn off the red and blue channels in the Epson scanning software. Will try that as well.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I can turn off the red and blue channels in the Epson scanning software. Will try that as well.

I get rid of the blue and red channels in PS, not at the scanner.
Image - Adjustments - Channel Mixer. Click on the monochrome box,( bottom left). Zero out the red, and blue channels. Put Green too 100%.

 

[destroya]

for simple viewing, judging the shot and simply web upload or email, I will try to get it as close to perfect as possible simply using vuescan. gets me 90% of the way there. then if I like a particular shot, like most above, I will scan flat and use PS to play with it

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I now scan flat except I adjust the histogram so I'm not clipping. I found auto adjustments clip. I don't use ICE or sharpen either during the scan.
Epson V600. 48 bit. 2400bpi. Epsonscan software. LR or Elements afterwards.

 

[Chan Tran]

When I still have my darkroom I scan my negatives with a Konica Minolta Dual Scan IV. I used all manuals settings to get the scan to look the way I wanted. Then I used the settings to figure out exposure time and filter setting to make my prints in the darkroom.. I don't really use the scan.

 

[Eric Rose]

I get rid of the blue and red channels in PS, not at the scanner.
Image - Adjustments - Channel Mixer. Click on the monochrome box,( bottom left). Zero out the red, and blue channels. Put Green too 100%.

I just did all of this and compared the scans from using just grn from the scanner vs scanning in full rgb and then cutting out the red and blue chan's in PS. The PS one was better. When I had done my initial experiments years ago it didn't seem to make much difference but with the new scanner I guess it does.

Old dogs can adopt new tricks

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

 

[Eric Rose]

Thanks Andrew.

 

[jtk]

I use Nikon 5000 V for 35mm. Using Win10 I rely on VueScan, which seems simpler than what I remember about Nikonscan. I don't do anything to modify the scan itself (no need) and I do rely on Ice, tho my film is generally free of dust, and was when I worked with an enlarger...even with point-source light.

VueScans go to PS which if desired can be modified for sharpness (or by NIK, which has advantages). Careful use never results directly in scan artifacts.

Excessive sharpening can cause artifacts such as white outlines at horizons and around leaves when viewed at 100%. NIK single frame HDR setting is fun but does inherently sharpen and can incidentally over-sharpen, producing artifacts. Makes for some fabulous skys, sometimes.

 

[jtk]

I use Nikon 5000 V for 35mm. Using Win10 I rely on VueScan, which seems simpler than what I remember about Nikonscan. I don't do anything to modify the scan itself (no need) and I do rely on Ice, tho my film is generally free of dust, and was when I worked with an enlarger...even with point-source light.

VueScans go to PS which if desired can be modified for sharpness (or by NIK, which has advantages). Careful use never results directly in scan artifacts.

Excessive sharpening can cause artifacts such as white outlines at horizons and around leaves when viewed at 100%. NIK single frame HDR setting is fun but does inherently sharpen and can incidentally over-sharpen, producing artifacts. Makes for some fabulous skys, sometimes.

 

[wahiba]

The one part of traditional photography that I do not miss is the enlarger and print making.

I certainly do scan my negatives, and sometimes transparencies.

I use an Epson V300 flatbed scanner which does a reasonable job at around 2400 dpi for 35mm and 1200 dpi for 120. As the scanner can only cope with 35mm wide film I scan 120 film twice and using Photoshop Panorama facility stich them together. Usually works OK and no sign of a joint.

It is a bit of a slow process though so to speed things up I bought a cheap and cheerful unit from Lidl, about £20. Much quicker than the flatbed but quality is not so good. However it is a good way of getting a whole film quickly scanned and then I can choose the ones to scan on the flatbed.

I have even tried using a digital camera to take a picture of the negative on a light box. those cheap and cheeful cinema style signs make good light boxes. While not brilliant it is good for quickies off larger negatives. It is also the quickest and easiest way to transfer 144 images from a strip from a Lomo Kino.

what is really great about scanned negatives is the ability to carry out electronic spotting, and of course 'photoshopping' to loose that awful wire across the picture.

I think the ability to scan negatives is probably aiding the rise in the number of people trying out analogue photography. It really is a great use of new tech with old tech.