How do you scan Velvia 50?

[Ariston]

Yeah, I think I missed the boat. I don't think they sell that anymore.

By the way, your images you linked to above look great. I forgot to say so earlier.

You have helped me out a lot, thank you!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Thanks for your compliment. I'm glad I helped you out. Post some shots when you get a chance.

 

[Wallendo]

One question to consider is: Are you trying to make a perfectly balanced digital image, or are you trying to reproduce the look of the actual slide.

I generally adjust the colors by setting the black and white point for each of the three colors using the levels control. This will probably more accurately reflect the initial scene, but may not completely match the slide.
Generally I scan with VueScan using the "neutral" setting with a black point of 0 and a white point of 0.1%. This generally does a good job of reproducing the slide.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

One question to consider is: Are you trying to make a perfectly balanced digital image, or are you trying to reproduce the look of the actual slide.

I generally adjust the colors by setting the black and white point for each of the three colors using the levels control. This will probably more accurately reflect the initial scene, but may not completely match the slide.
Generally I scan with VueScan using the "neutral" setting with a black point of 0 and a white point of 0.1%. This generally does a good job of reproducing the slide.

What does that mean with the Epsonscan software?

 

[MattKing]

I use Corel Aftershot, but I’m no good at it. I am allergic to subscription software.

I own Aftershot Pro and think that it is interesting as an alternative to Lightroom. I use it a bit, but think its value is, like Lightroom, more as a photographic inventory manager than as an editor. Aftershot Pro has one special advantage - one licence allows use in either Windows, Mac or Linux environments.
Most of my quick and dirty editing is done with a free/donation editor - Faststone. Faststone has the best image re-sizer I have found.
Most of my complex editing (layers. etc.) is done with Paintshop Pro.
So no subscriptions here.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I own Aftershot Pro and think that it is interesting as an alternative to Lightroom. I use it a bit, but think its value is, like Lightroom, more as a photographic inventory manager than as an editor. Aftershot Pro has one special advantage - one licence allows use in either Windows, Mac or Linux environments.
Most of my quick and dirty editing is done with a free/donation editor - Faststone. Faststone has the best image re-sizer I have found.
Most of my complex editing (layers. etc.) is done with Paintshop Pro.
So no subscriptions here.

For quick views and quick crops and resizing, I use Irfanview. Are you familiar with it? How does it compare with Fastone?

 

[Ariston]

I need to check these programs out. Aftershot is too cumbersome for just cropping, resizing, etc. It seems like I used to use a screen clipper from Faststone... maybe it was a different company.

 

[Ariston]

I own Aftershot Pro and think that it is interesting as an alternative to Lightroom. I use it a bit, but think its value is, like Lightroom, more as a photographic inventory manager than as an editor. Aftershot Pro has one special advantage - one licence allows use in either Windows, Mac or Linux environments.
Most of my quick and dirty editing is done with a free/donation editor - Faststone. Faststone has the best image re-sizer I have found.
Most of my complex editing (layers. etc.) is done with Paintshop Pro.
So no subscriptions here.

I do not do any heavy editing. I don't know that I would do anything beyond Aftershot's capabilities, but I would like to have access to an easy to use gradient tool.

I do not use it for inventory management. I am very low volume, and all the file locations pointing back and forth to each other confuses me.

 

[MattKing]

I need to check these programs out. Aftershot is too cumbersome for just cropping, resizing, etc. It seems like I used to use a screen clipper from Faststone... maybe it was a different company.

FastStone offer a fairly comprehensive editor - FastStone Image Viewer - and a few smaller utilities.
The absolutely best thing about Lightroom and Aftershot Pro is that if they are used properly, your original file remains unchanged, no matter how many edits and versions you make or create.
However, the complexity of the catalogue system is very high for those who come from a background of manual control of folders etc.
Neither FastStone nor Aftershot offer layers - and layers are very important if you want to consider doing DSLR scanning of C41 negatives (and a lot of other things).
And the fact that Aftershot Pro and Paintshop Pro are both Corel products is a real plus for me - nothing like supporting a Canadian company .
If you are wondering about using the Gradient tool in Paintshop Pro, googling Paintshop Pro gradient gives you a link to several resources.
It isn't a tool I've used.

 

[MattKing]

For quick views and quick crops and resizing, I use Irfanview. Are you familiar with it? How does it compare with Fastone?

I've only seen others use it. I don't see any reason to switch, so I haven't tried it.

 

[Ariston]

Neither FastStone nor Aftershot offer layers - and layers are very important if you want to consider doing DSLR scanning of C41 negatives (and a lot of other things).

I don't do DSLR scanning, but AfterShot 3, the version I have, uses layers. In the top right-hand corner you can add a layer by clicking on something that looks like a "copy" icon - it is the Layer Manager.

 

[GLS]

Velvia 50 in particular has a very dense base, and combined with any pure (or nearly pure) white in the frame it makes for a very large dynamic range to scan in a single pass. I do DSLR scanning with a D810, which can just about handle the DR in one shot, but it typically requires boosting the shadows in RAW a lot, to compensate for the dense film base and to get it looking like it does on a lightbox. I don't know what the dynamic range of a typical flatbed scanner is, but I suspect it is not enough for Velvia 50. You would probably benefit from doing multiple passes at different exposure values (if this is possible), then blending them into one file.

Here is one of my DSLR scans as an example:

 

[Patrick Robert James]

If you give Hasselblad your email address you can download their Phocus software for free which will probably do a much better job than "free" software from small companies. Phocus is similar to Capture One but not quite as sophisticated, but it is free, and good. Not sure why people on forums always ignore this suggestion and pfaff about with poor alternatives.....

 

[Wallendo]

I own Aftershot Pro and think that it is interesting as an alternative to Lightroom. I use it a bit, but think its value is, like Lightroom, more as a photographic inventory manager than as an editor. Aftershot Pro has one special advantage - one licence allows use in either Windows, Mac or Linux environments.
Most of my quick and dirty editing is done with a free/donation editor - Faststone. Faststone has the best image re-sizer I have found.
Most of my complex editing (layers. etc.) is done with Paintshop Pro.
So no subscriptions here.

Lightroom allows you to use it on two computers - I use it on a Mac desktop and Laptop PC. I generally disliked the subscription model, but the cost I now pay for PhotoShop and Lightroom is about what I used to pay to upgrade PhotoShop Essentials every year. I also "own" software which has been abandoned and can't be run on newer computers (Aperture, Soundtrack, Final Cut Express, etc).

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Velvia 50 in particular has a very dense base, and combined with any pure (or nearly pure) white in the frame it makes for a very large dynamic range to scan in a single pass. I do DSLR scanning with a D810, which can just about handle the DR in one shot, but it typically requires boosting the shadows in RAW a lot, to compensate for the dense film base and to get it looking like it does on a lightbox. I don't know what the dynamic range of a typical flatbed scanner is, but I suspect it is not enough for Velvia 50. You would probably benefit from doing multiple passes at different exposure values (if this is possible), then blending them into one file.

John, I found that you can open up the shadows more than at first realized using the shadow slider. You might actually be able to open up the darker shadow on the top potion of the tree trunk.

Regarding DR, transparency film has at the most about 5 stops (negatives about 7 stops) which is small enough to be covered by a single scan of a flatbed scanner. Film reduces down the huge range of natural light to the range of the film. D810's and other high DR camera are good for catching the original shots. Additional, flat beds are designed and calibrated to have the most penetration of light that's possible trading off distortion if it goes any higher. So even if you could go higher in light brightness, you'd only wind up distorting through the scanner's amplifiers. That's why scanners list their dMax figure. The higher that number, the better the penetration. But going higher would only distort.

I never scanned with a digital camera, so the process and results may be different.

 

[GLS]

Regarding DR, transparency film has at the most about 5 stops (negatives about 7 stops) which is small enough to be covered by a single scan of a flatbed scanner. Film reduces down the huge range of natural light to the range of the film.

It has nothing to do with the scene dynamic range that can be recorded by the slide film. Rather it is due to the film's resulting density range, and therefore the dynamic range in the projected image which results when a light source is shone through it. It is the latter that is recorded by digital capture, and it has a dynamic range far greater than 5-7 stops for slide film. The DMax-DMin range of projected Velvia 50 is around 3.8 (or nearly 13 stops) as far as I can tell from the data sheet. Although many flatbeds claim they have a DMax around this figure, it is my understanding that in reality most of the cheaper consumer models are significantly lower.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It is not so much to do with the scene dynamic range that can be recorded by the slide film, but the dynamic range in the projected image which results when a light source is shone through it; it is the latter that is recorded by digital capture, and it has a dynamic range far greater than 5-7 stops. The DMax-DMin range of projected Velvia 50 is around 3.8 (or nearly 13 stops) as far as I can tell from the data sheet. Although many flatbeds claim they have a DMax around this figure, my understanding is that in reality most of them are closer to 3.0 (or at least cheaper models are).

Aren't the scanners set to take advantage of the maximum light output and ability of sensors they can handle? It would be foolish for manufacturers to set the range so they can't get the most out of shadow areas. The light output will be the highest that the sensor can handle for each particular product. So doing another scan at a lowerer light output would not help getting more shadow details. And even if you push the light to go higher, you'll only wind up distorting. You've exceeded the capability of the sensors. Not much different with camera sensors. The higher the ISO, the higher the sensor amplification, The higher the noise and distortion.

 

[GLS]

The light output will be the highest that the sensor can handle for each particular product. So doing another scan at a lowerer light output would not help getting more shadow details.

You may well be right. The suggestion I made to that effect in post #37 was tentative on my part, as I do not use flatbeds myself so am not familiar with the workflow.

FYI, for the sake of clarity I made slight changes to my previous post after you quoted it.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

One other thing. The advantage of scanning totally flat is that it's fast - it takes me three minutes to scan three 6x7 medium format images without ICE. Also, you never have to scan again. If you do adjustments during the scan rather than in post, and later you don't like the results or just want to change it, you have to go find the film and scan it again. Also, you have to then repeat the removals of the dust spots.

Try it different ways and see what approach works best for you. Everyone develops their own methods. It can be frustrating at times. Don't blow your brains out. I promise it will get easier.

Vuescan can save both the processed image and the RAW in 64Bit RGBI, so you get the best of both worlds.

Like shooting both JPG and NEF.

 

[PhilBurton]

Vuescan can save both the processed image and the RAW in 64Bit RGBI, so you get the best of both worlds.

Like shooting both JPG and NEF.

How is a Vuescan RAW like an NEF? Does it save the scanned image in mosaic form like the output from a camera sensor?

 

[etn]

Velvia 50 in particular has a very dense base, and combined with any pure (or nearly pure) white in the frame it makes for a very large dynamic range to scan in a single pass. I do DSLR scanning with a D810, which can just about handle the DR in one shot, [...]

Here is one of my DSLR scans as an example:

This is a great picture, wonderfully scanned. Lovely. Thanks for sharing!

I too do DSLR scanning (I have a Df, whose dynamic range is probably a little bit smaller than the D810) and realized that the most of the picture is extracted by using HDR - at the expense of much more manual work (combining in Photoshop etc.) I created a small Matlab program to batch process DSLR scans: crop, invert (for negatives), optimize histogram. My next step is to add HDR to that automated processing.

 

[etn]

It has nothing to do with the scene dynamic range that can be recorded by the slide film. Rather it is due to the film's resulting density range, and therefore the dynamic range in the projected image which results when a light source is shone through it. It is the latter that is recorded by digital capture, and it has a dynamic range far greater than 5-7 stops for slide film. The DMax-DMin range of projected Velvia 50 is around 3.8 (or nearly 13 stops) as far as I can tell from the data sheet. Although many flatbeds claim they have a DMax around this figure, it is my understanding that in reality most of the cheaper consumer models are significantly lower.

Absolutely true.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

How is a Vuescan RAW like an NEF? Does it save the scanned image in mosaic form like the output from a camera sensor?

I do not think so, that would be incompatible with TIFF and DNG.

NEF in that its an unedited scan with all highlights and shadows retrained, no colour grading and even retaining the C-41 colour mask.

 

[GLS]

This is a great picture, wonderfully scanned. Lovely. Thanks for sharing!

I too do DSLR scanning (I have a Df, whose dynamic range is probably a little bit smaller than the D810) and realized that the most of the picture is extracted by using HDR - at the expense of much more manual work (combining in Photoshop etc.) I created a small Matlab program to batch process DSLR scans: crop, invert (for negatives), optimize histogram. My next step is to add HDR to that automated processing.

Thanks!

I exaggerated somewhat before when I said the D810 could "just about" cover the density range of Velvia 50. In fact it can handle it fairly comfortably, as at base ISO 64 it has a 14.8 stop dynamic range. The Df has 13.1 in comparison, so you should still be able to squeak by with perfect digital exposure in one frame. I don't know what the shadow recovery is like with the Df though, so all in all you are probably better off with the HDR approach, as you say.

 

[etn]

Thanks!

I exaggerated somewhat before when I said the D810 could "just about" cover the density range of Velvia 50. In fact it can handle it fairly comfortably, as at base ISO 64 it has a 14.8 stop dynamic range. The Df has 13.1 in comparison, so you should still be able to squeak by with perfect digital exposure in one frame. I don't know what the shadow recovery is like with the Df though, so all in all you are probably better off with the HDR approach, as you say.

Shadow recovery of the Df is pretty good. I really like the results and colors of that sensor, also how it behaves with older, less-than-perfectly-optimized-for-digital glass.
When scanning I (usually) bracket exposure anyway, so as to be able to select the optimal exposure. I take 5 frames, 0.7EV apart, centered somewhere between 0 and -1 EV (depending on the film density) Doing HDR on top of it is just software (and a no brainer if I can automatize it)