Using vuescan IR dust removal processing vs. photoshop

[geirtbr]

Vuescan gives the option of saving the dust-removal IR-scan as an extra layer in a tiff-file, instead of the program processing the dustremoval itself. I wonder if there is a lot to gain from doing this in photoshop, or if the image processing can be left to vuescan?

 

[brbo]

PS will do a better job.

If you are not after the quickest workflow it makes sense to save the scans as raw with IR layer. You can then still run that raw scans through Vuescan if you find PS workflow too slow.

 

[_T_]

The results from manually removing the dust and scratches using the IR layer can be much better than the automated dust removal in vuescan as doing so gives you full control over the process. It’s up to you, rather than some opaque algorithm, what the final product looks like.

 

[250swb]

I do it manually because of my motto 'if it looks like dust just pretend it's dust'. This goes back to spotting prints, there's dust, and then there's also also small distracting highlights that sometimes look like dust even if it's just a reflection from a tiny window in the far distance. So if there's just a speck of something that somebody else who wasn't there taking the photo could interpret as dust I remove it, because I rarely have the opportunity to explain it's just a reflection from a window.

 

[geirtbr]

@brbo I see! Yes then there is no reason not to save, as it only takes some more harddrive space. I searched and Darktable seems to be able to convert the 64-bit files natively using their algorithms.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Infrared IR doesn;t work with BW negatives or old Kodachrome slides. What do you do?