The colors don't look normal. The silver looks blue and I doubt if the yellow looks like that in actuality.
The colors don't look normal. The silver looks blue and I doubt if the yellow looks like that in actuality.I'm not sure I follow you, but I tried this, starting with this image as Background Layer:
Using eyedropper tool, I copied a sample of orange film base, pasted into a new Divide layer.
Next I created an Invert layer
And finally, I created a Levels Adjust layer. There, I set white and black points and midpoints for the R, G and B channels, and arrived at this:
Is that what you meant?
The LED light source I used for illumination may not be ideal for use with film. Not entirely neutral to my eyes either, it has a warmish-green tinge to it.The colors don't look normal. The silver looks blue and I doubt if the yellow looks like that in actuality.
View attachment 252919I scan my Ektar with Epson Scan software in manual / professional mode with Histogramm Adjustment for red, green and blue channel. The most important premise for a successful scan is a correctly exposed negative.
FUJI GA645Wi - EBC FUJINON 45mm f/4 - Ektar
The mask is trivial, but adjusting curves+gamma per-channel is annoying.
@Les Sarile My own experience (which generally follows what E4046 states) of Ektar is that it delivers about 7 stops of straight line information, but unlike Portra, should not under any circumstances be overexposed - the blue channel highlights upsweep quite fast in density (beneficial for specular highlights) - if you don't pay attention to this, it'll screw things up badly. Relying on autocorrections & a lack of knowledge as to what Ektar should look like (think Ektachrome-ish, but with better shadows - overall neutral balance, but with saturation) lead to most of the examples shown in this thread suffering from wonky/ wrong colour, or attempts to correct that.
If everything is linear enough, and the mask corrected for using a sample & divide method, you should be able to pull in the black point (on RGB on a curves layer, clipping on) to just clip the shadows/ rebate, then set the white point to about 150 units up the scale - ie if 'B' = 30, 'W' at 180 might not be far off - at least for something along the lines of a darkroom print. There will be mathematical reasons why this is, but I can't be bothered to work them out. Unless you have serious crossover issues, you shouldn't need (and indeed it can cause more problems than it solves) to clip the RGB individually. At this stage, you may want to do some minor colour corrections to suit the scene/ light balance of scene &/ or put a curve on it for tonal balance. Unfortunately all colour work beyond basic pre-sets requires a blended understanding of both science & art to get it to work well.
This is super quick, I even automated it, and it 80% of the time it gives me quite pleasant default. From there, I adjust saturation, white balance and I'm done in less than a minute.
With all due respect macfred, this is not a good scene to use for colour fidelity comparisons!
You might want to try ColorPerfect - the download (Photoshop / PhotoLine plug-in) works as a demo version so you can try out the conversion. It gives different results compared to curve manipulation; perhaps at somepoint I'll do a detailed comparison. www.colorperfect.com
Tom, I migrated off Lightroom/Photoshop after Adobe stopped selling them, can't use plugins
I use Ektar in medium format almost exclusively, and find it easier to scan than Portra 160, and about as easy as Fuji 400H.
I use Vuescan and would recommend inverting using the 'Vuescan Advanced Workflow' as summarised on the following page
http://benneh.net/techshit/better-colour-neg-scanning-with-vuescan/
Works wonderfully well giving me superb colours (even though the author says he doesn't use the method anymore)
You might want to try ColorPerfect
Not to put to fine a point on it, but AFAIK the only correction needed for RA4 prints are the filter pack.The mask varies with the image - the differing dyes present in the image result in a mask that differs in that part of the negative.
If there is cyan dye at location in the negative (which corresponds with red in the subject) the mask will be different than if there is blue dye at another location in the negative (which corresponds with yellow in the subject).
The mask doesn't just vary with density, it varies with subject colour.
For that reason the sampling done as part of the approach that uses inversion layers and a divide blend doesn't accurately neutralize the mask.
Correct.The mask does vary over the image, but so does the wrong response in the dyes it corrects.
So it all comes to linear global cast.
Correct?
Just use a tungsten or halogen source or an electronic flash - both have a CRI of 100.I am now on my 5th day of researching this and right now my attention is 100% on light sources. CRI of 95 may not be good enough for DSLR scanning.
How do you explain then that regular RA4 printing is able to remove the mask with simpleIt does. Because division or multiplication (you can do both, its the same thing) lead to the desired result. The masked areas are affected by a greater/smaller degree as opposed to subtraction. Lachland recently sent me a RAW negative scan from an Imacon and it's been a breath of fresh air to experiment with it (as opposed to camera capture). You really see how colors "snap" into place when the mask is correctly removed.
Most likely because an optical subtraction using a filter is equivalent to using division when merging two layers using post-processing software such as Paintshop Pro and Photoshop.How do you explain then that regular RA4 printing is able to remove the mask with simple
subtraction from a static filter?
How do you explain then that regular RA4 printing is able to remove the mask with simple subtraction from a static filter?
That doesn’t make sense to me.Most likely because an optical subtraction using a filter is equivalent to using division when merging two layers using post-processing software such as Paintshop Pro and Photoshop.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?