Question about correcting scans

[pamphoto]

Hello, I recently got back my 120 scans, and they all look very "thin" if that makes sense. It's not that the images are underexposed, just "airy." I am not sure how this lab is scanning the film (Dwayne's). See image for direct from lab scan.

I would like to fix this and give the images more "substance" but I cannot get them to look natural.

Does anyone have any pointers to get the images looking better? I hope to rescan them one day when I can get a copy stand and negative carrier.
Thank you

 

[henryyjjames]

IMO, start with a boost in contrast, bring down the exposure a bit, and adjust curves to help the shadows blacken.

 

[pamphoto]

Thank you Henry. I tried adjusting shadows in LR but, the colors seemed off and made the images look harsh. I will try to play in PS and see if I get better results.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You have to start with levels (black and white points) or Black and White sliders. Or just hit Auto to get you started and adjust from there. It seems the scans were done without edits during the scan. In other words flat. Dwayne's is leaving it up to you to make adjustments which I think is the best way. Then you make the adjustments you want.

 

[pamphoto]

You have to start with levels (black and white points) or Black and White sliders. Or just hit Auto to get you started and adjust from there. It seems the scans were done without edits during the scan. In other words flat. Dwayne's is leaving it up to you to make adjustments which I think is the best way. Then you make the adjustments you want.

Thank you Alan. I am new to all this scanning negatives and making my own adjustments! Ha! Last time I shot film, I developed and printed it myself in class. It's been a little bit.
I'm just trying to get natural looking images and was hoping someone might have a pointer or two. I'll keep playing and try not to get frustrated.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Take your time. LR can provide all the adjustments you need. Hit AUTO first in the BASIC window of LR. Then adjust from there. As you get more experienced, then you can start with individual sliders if you wish. Dwaynes seems to have done a decent scan to start with. Good luck.

 

[pamphoto]

Take your time. LR can provide all the adjustments you need. Hit AUTO first in the BASIC window of LR. Then adjust from there. As you get more experienced, then you can start with individual sliders if you wish. Dwaynes seems to have done a decent scan to start with. Good luck.

Thank you Alan. I will keep playing and try to figure all this out. It's so different from digital image adjustments where I'm use to having a "thick" or dense looking image to start with.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Thank you Alan. I will keep playing and try to figure all this out. It's so different from digital image adjustments where I'm use to having a "thick" or dense looking image to start with.

I always adjust the histogram first with black and white points as above. That gets you into a normal range of color and contrast. Then do minor adjustments from there.

 

[grain elevator]

I always adjust the histogram first with black and white points as above. That gets you into a normal range of color and contrast. Then do minor adjustments from there.

This is solid advice. Don't have other tools start with data that are off. Bring them into a reasonable range first.

 

[pamphoto]

I always adjust the histogram first with black and white points as above. That gets you into a normal range of color and contrast. Then do minor adjustments from there.

This is solid advice. Don't have other tools start with data that are off. Bring them into a reasonable range first.

Thank you!!

 

[koraks]

Hello, I recently got back my 120 scans, and they all look very "thin" if that makes sense. It's not that the images are underexposed, just "airy." I am not sure how this lab is scanning the film (Dwayne's). See image for direct from lab scan.

It's a pretty flat scan, in the sense that it's low in contrast and saturation. This is actually a nice starting point for further color correction, given that the file is saved in 16 bit color depth (typically TIFF, but PNG is possible as well these days). If you get JPG files like this, then it makes sense to re-scan them or next time ask the lab to give you 16 bit TIFF files instead.

The reason why a flat scan like this is useful is because absolutely no image information is lost - all shadow detail is there, as are the highlights. You have entirely free choice in placing them on the final tonal scale wherever you want. @Alan Edward Klein and @henryyjjames have shown a couple of ways how to do this.

What I also quite like about the example you gave, is that the actual color balance looks pretty decent for a scan from a color negative. Yes, the colors look 'washed out' because of the flat contrast, but there is no major color cast.

What the lab has done, in fact, is give you something conceptually similar to a digital raw file that might get from a digital camera. From here, it's up to the person doing the post processing to decide how they want the image to look in the end.

If this scan is representative for what this lab is doing, and especially if they give 16 bit TIFF files like this, they're a keeper! Good job.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Be sure you have a duplicate scan file to work on, especially while you are learning. You don't want destroy your original while learning how to use the software.

Adobe products are powerful tools that require time and effort to learn. Search for tutorials - I think the ones by Julieanne Kost are particularly good. She does tutorials for both Photoshop and Lightroom. I find I am able to do anything my scanned images need using only Lightroom - and I prefer using the Lightroom tools compared to Photoshop. That is, unless you have a lot of dust and scratches which might be more conveniently repaired in Photoshop.

 

[pamphoto]

It's a pretty flat scan, in the sense that it's low in contrast and saturation. This is actually a nice starting point for further color correction, given that the file is saved in 16 bit color depth (typically TIFF, but PNG is possible as well these days). If you get JPG files like this, then it makes sense to re-scan them or next time ask the lab to give you 16 bit TIFF files instead.

The reason why a flat scan like this is useful is because absolutely no image information is lost - all shadow detail is there, as are the highlights. You have entirely free choice in placing them on the final tonal scale wherever you want. @Alan Edward Klein and @henryyjjames have shown a couple of ways how to do this.

What I also quite like about the example you gave, is that the actual color balance looks pretty decent for a scan from a color negative. Yes, the colors look 'washed out' because of the flat contrast, but there is no major color cast.

What the lab has done, in fact, is give you something conceptually similar to a digital raw file that might get from a digital camera. From here, it's up to the person doing the post processing to decide how they want the image to look in the end.

If this scan is representative for what this lab is doing, and especially if they give 16 bit TIFF files like this, they're a keeper! Good job.

Thank you Koraks.
This is helpful information. I think I just needed a good place to begin.
I am going to edit the scans and then print them so I can see them better.

 

[pamphoto]

Be sure you have a duplicate scan file to work on, especially while you are learning. You don't want destroy your original while learning how to use the software.

Adobe products are powerful tools that require time and effort to learn. Search for tutorials - I think the ones by Julieanne Kost are particularly good. She does tutorials for both Photoshop and Lightroom. I find I am able to do anything my scanned images need using only Lightroom - and I prefer using the Lightroom tools compared to Photoshop. That is, unless you have a lot of dust and scratches which might be more conveniently repaired in Photoshop.

Thank you
I have been editing them in Lightroom to begin with. I think I just needed a good place to start with editing since using scans as such is new to me.

 

[250swb]

Thank you Henry. I tried adjusting shadows in LR but, the colors seemed off and made the images look harsh. I will try to play in PS and see if I get better results.

Just click on 'Auto Color' and 'Auto Contrast' in Photoshop and you will get a vast improvement.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the lab scan. They have aimed to give you as much information as possible without inflicting their own opinion on the photo, and a bit of post processing is to be expected.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I found that Auto levels adjust in Epsonscan could clip the highlights. Elements will adjust Levels the same as Epsonscan if you scanned flat. I now use manual level adjust (black and white point) before the scan to right before and after the light range shown ion the histogram, although Lightroom auto seems to do an OK job with flat scans.