I could be wrong, but the scanner probably got the color balance wrong and hence the pink tone in the highlights. The colors in the light table pic are closer to what you see in the slides.
Posted to give an idea about what scanner saw and what got edited in Lightroom, as it'll inevitably look different than what's posted above on the light table.
No, my friend - you're EXACTLY RIGHT - will remove/update the nonsense I posted - thanks for pointing this out.I could be wrong, but the scanner probably got the color balance wrong
Careful what you say - in my experience, they tend to hold a grudgeI need to speak with my scanner
While I appreciate the sentiment, I have hard time accepting such deviation and there's far more accurate examples I've posted already in those strips, so it's not really a loss. Good riddance I'd say + I need to speak with my scanner.
That or to tone Highlights selectively in Lightroom to match the projection more closely, I'll repost those examples if I'll come ± close.
I can do better and should've never posted it
But when said RAW gets Imported in LR and WB set to Tungsten, I takes on a pinkish cast too, far less dramatic. So I'll have to work with my scans from projection on the side for better representation.
That's the first thing I did, but correcting highlight cast this way messed up the rest of the picture and I didn't get anywhere, so I'm thinking of Split Toning in LR - That'll work just visually by comparison and leave the rest alone.You may want to adjust Temp and Tint on LR to get the colors on the screen match the projection.
I scanned some slides that I had toned using Kala Namak toner as described in post #30. Here is how the sepia tone on the slides looks like.
Only likely to occur, surely Matt, if you call it a regressive and say you will hold it to account?Careful what you say - in my experience, they tend to hold a grudge.
I guess they're in league withCareful what you say - in my experience, they tend to hold a grudge.
I guess they're in league withSatanPrinters.
Had another blast today - pushing Kentmere 400 2 stops and doing partial redevelopment/toning. A stack of two toned slides ready for projection. Reversed as normal > 3min redevelopment > Wash > Toning to completion > Fix.
I heard you like Kala Namak so while I was cooking with Kala Namak I took a picture of Kala Namak and toned it in Kala Namak.
I'm working on it!I'd like to see some silver gelatin paper now....
I'm working on it!
THANK YOUDamn...this is good...you guys are taking this to new heights.
Sweet, man!Here're a few results from my recent attempt at split toning using Kala Namak toner.
Here're a few results from my recent attempt at split toning using Kala Namak toner. This is Kodak Double X film reversal processed. I used a diluted Kala Namak toner (1/2 TSP in 500ml water) as the second developer for about five minutes and then completed the second development in a regular B&W developer.
#1:
View attachment 297645
#2:
View attachment 297646
#3:
View attachment 297725
Split-toning of slides via second development is a bit tricky as you get only one chance. On the positive side, it gives finer grain than full sepia toning and finer detail than partial bleach followed by sepia toning.
THANK YOU
Sweet, man!
And let's not forget these hard working men, literally bringing a mountain to us!
When you say split tone, you meant warm tone towards the highlights and the shadows more neutral, right? I may be wrong, but I am seeing fairly even warm tone all over - perhaps KN is too fast as the first developer or it is fairly linear across the tonal range?
No, it's a visual pattern created by overlaying and rotating one layer a bit. And packing said sandwich in a slide mount to project/scan/enjoyRegarding your picture of Kala Namak, did you arrange it in some kind of circular pattern?
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?