V750 Scanner problem

Hello
Has anyone seen this fault that has developed recently?

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/SRTrokf1-4vivmacro947.jpg

I can get by, by cropping the shot using the Epson software before the second scan (after preview) but would like to know if this is the start of something that is going to get worse?

start of what?

pellicle said:

start of what?

Click to expand...

Tracking problem? I don't know where all the crap is coming from around the negative frame, also the black bars could be taking some of the picture.

ok

wasn't clear from your post ... so I had no idea what to look for

so, how are you working? I mean pretend I can't see what you're doing and I need a few words to understand your working method

for instance, are you working with the standard holder, previewing the entire plattern and then selecting some images

sort of like this:



btw ... I know nothing about your skill levels, but in case you are not an old hand at it, it might be worth reading the blog post that image is from.

pellicle said:

ok

wasn't clear from your post ... so I had no idea what to look for

so, how are you working? I mean pretend I can't see what you're doing and I need a few words to understand your working method

for instance, are you working with the standard holder, previewing the entire plattern and then selecting some images

sort of like this:

btw ... I know nothing about your skill levels, but in case you are not an old hand at it, it might be worth reading the blog post that image is from.

Click to expand...

Well I'm only experienced in quantity. When set in pro mode there seems to be a problem although in full auto a bit of the shot was chopped off.

Supermarket scan heavily sharpened, 99p for 36 shots on a CD:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/Photo20_18A.jpg

V750 on full auto with some of the frame missing, but clean:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/testing016.jpg

Pro mode, nothing ticked as it comes, 2400dpi, red crap on right was on preview and final scan:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/testing019.jpg

but how are you working?

thumbnails ... selection from plattern as I said above ... how?

I have to agree with Chris, from your posts so far it is hard to know how to help you. If your issue is that the software autocropping is guessing wrong and not cropping each frame correctly, this is a common problem. Most people quickly learn it is actually faster/more efficient to manually crop and set up a manual batch scan. I put up some tips for this here:

http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/batchscanning.html

Doug

pellicle said:

but how are you working?

thumbnails ... selection from plattern as I said above ... how?

Click to expand...

Well thanks all for replying.......I must have scanned over 1000 negs/pos/35mm/6X4.5/6X7/bw/colour on an Epson 2480 and v750 and just scan in pro mode with thumbnail preview, use auto colour correction now again with Epson software or more correction in Photoshop and although I'm not an expert getting the best from negs esp b/w with grain, my results are quite good in my opinion.
e.g.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/lolaparty3.jpg
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/img374.jpg

It's just all this crap has recently appeared around the neg frames that I never had before, it's not on the neg so the scanner is adding it and instead of scanning all 24 (or chosen ones) in one go after preview have now to crop each chosen one, otherwise I get a picture in print or on a computer screen like in my first post.
Here's another eg:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/t90kir80-200f4957.jpg

I was hoping someone would say "I had that problem and it was so and so" to save me from a lot of work trying to pin down the problem, and I did try the link given, using histogram and not using thumbnails etc, but the end result was similar (maybe better if I did more tests) but found it was more difficult as you can't see the neg in positive like thumbnails/zoom to decide what is worth scanning.

Sorry, I am coming late to this thread, but exactly what is the problem?
Scans need to be cropped -- the software always needs help selecting the scan area -- and the color balances are off. Am I missing something else?

excalibur2 said:

Well thanks all for replying.......I must have scanned over 1000 negs/pos/35mm/6X4.5/6X7/bw/colour on an Epson 2480 and v750 and just scan in pro mode with thumbnail preview, use auto colour correction now again with Epson software or more correction in Photoshop and although I'm not an expert getting the best from negs esp b/w with grain, my results are quite good in my opinion.
e.g.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/lolaparty3.jpg
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/img374.jpg

It's just all this crap has recently appeared around the neg frames that I never had before, it's not on the neg so the scanner is adding it and instead of scanning all 24 (or chosen ones) in one go after preview have now to crop each chosen one, otherwise I get a picture in print or on a computer screen like in my first post.
Here's another eg:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/t90kir80-200f4957.jpg

I was hoping someone would say "I had that problem and it was so and so" to save me from a lot of work trying to pin down the problem, and I did try the link given, using histogram and not using thumbnails etc, but the end result was similar (maybe better if I did more tests) but found it was more difficult as you can't see the neg in positive like thumbnails/zoom to decide what is worth scanning.

Click to expand...

pschwart said:

Sorry, I am coming late to this thread, but exactly what is the problem?
Scans need to be cropped -- the software always needs help selecting the scan area -- and the color balances are off. Am I missing something else?

Click to expand...

Well before I just selected preview scan and 24 (or whatever) thumbnails showed on the screen, I could then select "full size" (which was a bit larger than thumbnail) and crop if necessary each frame, then select scan and all the pics were automatically sent to windows viewer. Each frame was clean with no crap around them.
Now I have no choice (i.e. whether to crop or not) as every frame has to be cropped because of the crap around the frame.

But you are saying "Scans need to be cropped -- the software always needs help selecting the scan area".........so I've been scanning incorrectly for about a year?

***and the color balances are off***

Well the paving shots were scanned using the method in the link given, the scans didn't come out very good and I used auto color in photoshop. The toad and children would come under "artistic licence" unless the mother knew exactly what colour clothes the kids were wearing.

I normally use Vuescan, but I just tried using Epson Scan. Here is what I see:
- Professional mode, B&W negatives. Scan borders are clean. Scanning
thumbnails, selecting full-size, cropping, and scanning works fine.
- Full auto mode, B&W negatives. Does not correctly index/crop the
individual frames in the strip. Long edges are clean though. This mode also
only scans in 8-bit RGB -- no B&W option. To add insult to injury, it crashed
Photoshop CS.
- Professional mode, color negatives. Individual frames are correctly indexed
and cropped. All edges are clean.
- Full-auto mode, color negatives. Individual frames are correctly indexed
and cropped. All edges are clean.

I'd say don't bother with full-auto for anything except quick proofs. Sorry, this doesn't explain why your frames are not correctly indexed by the software.

Cropping: Vuescan doesn't provide thumbnails for individual frames so I have to select and crop frames when I scan. Every one of my images gets at least minimally processed in PS so cropping is just part of the process anyway.
I don't care doe Epson Scan, but it does appear to be working for me.

Color balances: OK, I won't argue with artistic license Feel free to ignore, but if *I* were correcting the color of the kids, I would start with the skin tones which I think are way too blue. I would begin correcting the frog image by reducing the saturation, setting the white and black points, and probably reducing the yellow cast. Photoshop Auto Color can get you closer, but it almost always needs further adjustment. In the end it's usually easier to just curves and adjustment layers. Even a color adjustment layer will give you more control and still let you preview the changes.

excalibur2 said:

Well before I just selected preview scan and 24 (or whatever) thumbnails showed on the screen, I could then select "full size" (which was a bit larger than thumbnail) and crop if necessary each frame, then select scan and all the pics were automatically sent to windows viewer. Each frame was clean with no crap around them.
Now I have no choice (i.e. whether to crop or not) as every frame has to be cropped because of the crap around the frame.

But you are saying "Scans need to be cropped -- the software always needs help selecting the scan area".........so I've been scanning incorrectly for about a year?

***and the color balances are off***

Well the paving shots were scanned using the method in the link given, the scans didn't come out very good and I used auto color in photoshop. The toad and children would come under "artistic licence" unless the mother knew exactly what colour clothes the kids were wearing.

Click to expand...

Hi

excalibur2 said:

Well thanks all for replying.......I must have scanned over 1000 negs/pos/35mm/6X4.5/6X7/bw/colour on an Epson 2480 and v750 and just scan in pro mode with thumbnail preview, use auto colour

Click to expand...

well, I wouldn't care to count how many I've scaned on an Epson 3200, 4780 and 4900 over the last several years ...

but I seldom use thumbnail because it shits me badly. Especially with 35mm it makes bad guesses on where my frames are and does things I don't like.

particularly with dark frames ...

grain, my results are quite good in my opinion.
e.g.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/img374.jpg

Click to expand...

nice frog shot ...

It's just all this crap has recently appeared around the neg frames that I never had before, it's not on the neg so the scanner is adding it and instead of scanning all 24 (or chosen ones) in one go after preview have now to crop each chosen one, otherwise I get a picture in print or on a computer screen like in my first post.
Here's another eg:-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/t90kir80-200f4957.jpg

Click to expand...

looking at that image above I wonder why I'm seeing what appears to be film base ... is it being masked off?

are you using the standard holders?

how are you placing them in the holders?

I do not expect to see film base ... so perhaps neither does the software

what film is this??

I was hoping someone would say "I had that problem and it was so and so" to save me from a lot of work trying to pin down the problem, and I did try the link given, using histogram and not using thumbnails etc, but the end result was similar (maybe better if I did more tests) but found it was more difficult as you can't see the neg in positive like thumbnails/zoom to decide what is worth scanning.

Click to expand...

never had a problem, and I like (now that I understand the colour managemnt issues) more than vuescan.

did you read that link I posted? I find it the best way to work with epson scan


If you can tell me more about what your doing perhaps I can help, but you seem to make bucketloads of assumptions and so if you make it clear I can perhaps spot an issue ... but take a few minutes to re-read my questions and if you post back I can try to help

***Looking at that image above I wonder why I'm seeing what appears to be film base ... is it being masked off?

are you using the standard holders?

how are you placing them in the holders?

I do not expect to see film base ... so perhaps neither does the software

what film is this??***

Well I'm doing nothing different to what I have been doing for a year, but now I don't get a clean scanned frame as in e.g.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/t90kir80-200f4957.jpg
and
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/SRTrokf1-4vivmacro947.jpg

But the experts here can't see the problem as they crop each frame anyway, but I only crop by choice...so it looks like I'm forced to do it the experts way either at the scan stage or final scanned jpg in photoshop.
Any flatbed should produce a clean frame around the shot with supplied holders, but if my V750 doesn't get worse it's just a slight hassle as I'm not that a good photographer that every shot needs to be cropped for printing or for emailing etc

Btw three different makes of film tested and no difference, problem exists

I've tried viewscan and have silverfast and they are the most unfriendly programs I've come across...too much hassle trying to learn how to use them, and I did try.

***did you read that link I posted? I find it the best way to work with epson scan***

Yes I did, and it's great to just do what someone has work out, rather than spend hours in front of a computer experimenting......I'll try and marry up with thumbnails first and compare with more tests on the plattern version.
But what I wasn't sure about was:- how you shift the histogram of blue to the left, if it's in the middle.

***Color balances: OK, I won't argue with artistic license Feel free to ignore, but if *I* were correcting the color of the kids, I would start with the skin tones which I think are way too blue. I would begin correcting the frog image by reducing the saturation, setting the white and black points, and probably reducing the yellow cast. Photoshop Auto Color can get you closer, but it almost always needs further adjustment. In the end it's usually easier to just curves and adjustment layers. Even a color adjustment layer will give you more control and still let you preview the changes.***

Well I could have another problem in that my 22" CRT Mitsubishi is not calibrated properly as all my finished shots look ok to me.

I can *see* the problem, I just can *reproduce* it with either B&W or color negatives using the Epson film holder. Pellicle asked some good questions ...
If your workflow produced different results previously, then you might look for that seemingly small detail that has changed. Is the problem reproducible with any random strip of B&W or color negatives? Have you tried scanning color negatives of a different film type? I assume you are scanning with the emulsion side up; how about flopping the film in the holder and scanning emulsion down, just to see what happens?

excalibur2 said:

***Looking at that image above I wonder why I'm seeing what appears to be film base ... is it being masked off?

are you using the standard holders?

how are you placing them in the holders?

I do not expect to see film base ... so perhaps neither does the software

what film is this??***

Well I'm doing nothing different to what I have been doing for a year, but now I don't get a clean scanned frame as in e.g.
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/t90kir80-200f4957.jpg
and
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/SRTrokf1-4vivmacro947.jpg

But the experts here can't see the problem as they crop each frame anyway, but I only crop by choice...so it looks like I'm forced to do it the experts way either at the scan stage or final scanned jpg in photoshop.
Any flatbed should produce a clean frame around the shot with supplied holders, but if my V750 doesn't get worse it's just a slight hassle as I'm not that a good photographer that every shot needs to be cropped for printing or for emailing etc

Btw three different makes of film tested and no difference, problem exists

I've tried viewscan and have silverfast and they are the most unfriendly programs I've come across...too much hassle trying to learn how to use them, and I did try.

***did you read that link I posted? I find it the best way to work with epson scan***

Yes I did, and it's great to just do what someone has work out, rather than spend hours in front of a computer experimenting......I'll try and marry up with thumbnails first and compare with more tests on the plattern version.
But what I wasn't sure about was:- how you shift the histogram of blue to the left, if it's in the middle.

Click to expand...

***I can *see* the problem, I just can *reproduce* it with either B&W or color negatives using the Epson film holder. Pellicle asked some good questions ...
If your workflow produced different results previously, then you might look for that seemingly small detail that has changed. Is the problem reproducible with any random strip of B&W or color negatives? Have you tried scanning color negatives of a different film type? I assume you are scanning with the emulsion side up; how about flopping the film in the holder and scanning emulsion down, just to see what happens?***

Never mattered in the past how I put the 35mm neg in the holder, and just re-scanned a good 35mm strip and now crap around the frames. Also crap now around 6X6 neg :-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/testing027.jpg
Also tried just one frame still a problem, and home mode same, but full auto a bit better.
The spaces between and around the negs are clean, when held up to the light and the scanner at the supermarket produced a nice CD.

Oh well, I can move the scanner to my second computer and try that or re-install the software...if I find out what was the problem will post.......Thanks all for your interest.

Bummer. These gremlins pop up now and again. Look st the good side: at least the noise is outside the image area Try some B&W negs if you have some available.

excalibur2 said:

***I can *see* the problem, I just can *reproduce* it with either B&W or color negatives using the Epson film holder. Pellicle asked some good questions ...
If your workflow produced different results previously, then you might look for that seemingly small detail that has changed. Is the problem reproducible with any random strip of B&W or color negatives? Have you tried scanning color negatives of a different film type? I assume you are scanning with the emulsion side up; how about flopping the film in the holder and scanning emulsion down, just to see what happens?***

Never mattered in the past how I put the 35mm neg in the holder, and just re-scanned a good 35mm strip and now crap around the frames. Also crap now around 6X6 neg :-
http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn172/chakrata/testing027.jpg
Also tried just one frame still a problem, and home mode same, but full auto a bit better.
The spaces between and around the negs are clean, when held up to the light and the scanner at the supermarket produced a nice CD.

Oh well, I can move the scanner to my second computer and try that or re-install the software...if I find out what was the problem will post.......Thanks all for your interest.

Click to expand...

Problem solved and Epson need to be spanked.

Transferred to other operating system winxp and no problem, back to Vista a problem, so just a matter of finding what was different.....well if you select large thumbnail cropping area you get the problem (I must have switched it there and forgot) and I have no idea why you are given the choice between large and small as they look the same size after preview scan, except if you select large you get a lot of crap around the frame..

Hi

glad to hear its solved

excalibur2 said:

Problem solved and Epson need to be spanked.

Click to expand...

all too often the case ... they make good hardware and quite functional software, however their documentation department never seem to speak to their engineer (I'm guessing its one or two guys) so their features go undetected.

perhaps they figure that their target audience is so spoon fed that the wouldn't get it ... perhaps that true for 80% of their customers, but there are serious and competent imaging types among the other 20%

I think they should lift their game.

I think that its woeful that I can produce better documentation on their stuff

Transferred to other operating system winxp and no problem, back to Vista a problem,

Click to expand...

so there was a hidden assumption ... nowhere do you say you moved OS which is 100% a critical factor.

its always easier to give help with more information than "I've got a problem"

(said in case you ever ask anything again ... our time is given freely based on our interest in helping fellow travellers ... we don't get paid and we don't have to do it)

so just a matter of finding what was different.....well if you select large thumbnail cropping area you get the problem (I must have switched it there and forgot) and I have no idea why you are given the choice between large and small as they look the same size after preview scan, except if you select large you get a lot of crap around the frame..

Click to expand...

my guess is that the 'crap' is just the the targeting area is less discriminating. I recommend you do yourself a favour and at least ONCE try scanning the entire plattern and looking around.

Try doing it as positive not negative and see what you get ... the results will be educational I'm sure.

***so there was a hidden assumption ... nowhere do you say you moved OS which is 100% a critical factor.
its always easier to give help with more information than "I've got a problem"**

erm no I didn't change the OS but at a last resort tried the scanner on my 2nd computer and did say in #16:- "Oh well, I can move the scanner to my second computer and try that or re-install the software...if I find out what was the problem will post.......Thanks all for your interest".

***(said in case you ever ask anything again ... our time is given freely based on our interest in helping fellow travellers ... we don't get paid and we don't have to do it)***

Well if someone with a V750 had selected "large thumbnails" they could have solved the problem after #1, maybe you get the same result with the 4990 and so on, going back.......

***I recommend you do yourself a favour and at least ONCE try scanning the entire plattern and looking around. Try doing it as positive not negative and see what you get ... the results will be educational I'm sure.***

Well tried scanning as a positive neg and inverting, cropping a scanned plattern and so on, but why do you hate thumbnails?

If a shot is correctly exposed and average, e.g. no bright lights and deep shadows, the scanner in quite a few times will produce a nice jpg without any "auto color" histograms or work in PS.
Ok if what I have just written is rubbish and not the pro's way, then what is wrong in selecting crop on the thumbnail, then applying as per link for the histogram colours, then final scan, then finally adjust in PS?
What I didn't understand in the link was:- cropping in the plattern view, adjusting histogram and so on, then the link say use "auto color" in PS if required, well wouldn't that ruin all the work done with histograms etc?

Configuration->Thumbnail Cropping Area-> Large

I'm thinking this is a feature for users who want to scan full frame, i.e. don't want the software to automatically crop to the image area. In other words, not a bug, functions as designed. Check the manual.

If a shot is correctly exposed and average, e.g. no bright lights and deep shadows, the scanner in quite a few times will produce a nice jpg without any "auto color" histograms or work in PS.

If you get a scan that needs zero adjustments, it is a fluke. I would expect adjustments are necessary even if your monitor and scanner are calibrated.
Auto corrections anywhere in the workflow may get you closer but will almost always need tweaking. All scans are going to benefit from some sharpening anyway, so might as well just make most of your adjustments in Photoshop. That said, if you are happy with your scans, you have no
worries.

excalibur2 said:

***so there was a hidden assumption ... nowhere do you say you moved OS which is 100% a critical factor.
its always easier to give help with more information than "I've got a problem"**

erm no I didn't change the OS but at a last resort tried the scanner on my 2nd computer and did say in #16:- "Oh well, I can move the scanner to my second computer and try that or re-install the software...if I find out what was the problem will post.......Thanks all for your interest".

***(said in case you ever ask anything again ... our time is given freely based on our interest in helping fellow travellers ... we don't get paid and we don't have to do it)***

Well if someone with a V750 had selected "large thumbnails" they could have solved the problem after #1, maybe you get the same result with the 4990 and so on, going back.......

***I recommend you do yourself a favour and at least ONCE try scanning the entire plattern and looking around. Try doing it as positive not negative and see what you get ... the results will be educational I'm sure.***

Well tried scanning as a positive neg and inverting, cropping a scanned plattern and so on, but why do you hate thumbnails?

If a shot is correctly exposed and average, e.g. no bright lights and deep shadows, the scanner in quite a few times will produce a nice jpg without any "auto color" histograms or work in PS.
Ok if what I have just written is rubbish and not the pro's way, then what is wrong in selecting crop on the thumbnail, then applying as per link for the histogram colours, then final scan, then finally adjust in PS?
What I didn't understand in the link was:- cropping in the plattern view, adjusting histogram and so on, then the link say use "auto color" in PS if required, well wouldn't that ruin all the work done with histograms etc?

Click to expand...

***That said, if you are happy with your scans, you have no worries.***

Well yes you should be pleased in a hobby, but it's a bonus if other people like my scans as well and not a case of "the emperors clothes"

Hi

excalibur2 said:

***so there was a hidden assumption ... nowhere do you say you moved OS which is 100% a critical factor.
its always easier to give help with more information than "I've got a problem"**

erm no I didn't change the OS but at a last resort tried the scanner on my 2nd computer and did say in #16:- "Oh well, I can move the scanner to

Click to expand...

it would be nice if you could click on the quote button rather than insert these *** things which are real hard to follow

also, its been rather an uphill fight asking for information to help you with your questions ...

***I recommend you do yourself a favour and at least ONCE try scanning the entire plattern and looking around. Try doing it as positive not negative and see what you get ... the results will be educational I'm sure.***

Well tried scanning as a positive neg and inverting, cropping a scanned plattern and so on, but why do you hate thumbnails?

Click to expand...

without going back and reading all of what I wrote I thought I'd said that it has to do with the machine cropping (if you don't understand what this means please ask)

also they do not work reliably (as your finding) in all cases (expecially dark frames) especially when scanning negative as positive (which I routinely do)

If a shot is correctly exposed and average, e.g. no bright lights and deep shadows, the scanner in quite a few times will produce a nice jpg without any "auto color" histograms or work in PS.

Click to expand...

that is quite an incorrect assumption about "correct exposure"

not every scene will fit into that desciption. Further negative responds quite differently to slide with density ... how dark something is and how clear something is

Ok if what I have just written is rubbish and not the pro's way, then what is wrong in selecting crop on the thumbnail, then applying as per link for the histogram colours, then final scan, then finally adjust in PS?
What I didn't understand in the link was:- cropping in the plattern view, adjusting histogram and so on, then the link say use "auto color" in PS if required, well wouldn't that ruin all the work done with histograms etc?

Click to expand...

if you say so

Dear excalibur2

I realize that I have brough my own assumptions to the table, that is; that you were interested in learning and understanding about what it was that you did, and that you were wanting to develop your skills.

that was wrong of me.

Initially you asked if something was a sign of a problem and after some time we get to the bottom of it and find that it was not.

To answer clearly your initial question (knowing what I know now) I do not believe that there is any problem with your scanner and that what you are seeing is not a sign of further issues. Rest at ease.

I'm sorry to have made assumptions that you were trying to learn the things which I think are important.

since you say:

excalibur2 said:

Well yes you should be pleased in a hobby, but it's a bonus if other people like my scans as well and not a case of "the emperors clothes"

Click to expand...

I will add that if you're happy with the look then that's all that matters.

If you are interested in the answers to any of the other questions you have raised in this thread please by all means ask them again and as I have time I will try to answer them.

excalibur2

I had a moment, so I thought I would load some of your images and point out a few things ...


Firstly the stuff that you are seeing after the black border here is most likely the edge of the "black thing which holds the film"



its appearance here is of no consequence, but simply suggests that the software is making a mistake in judging where the edges are ... this is why many people (usually experienced people who are particular about things) don't like using the thumbnails view.

In this segment you can see both the edge of the area of film exposed by the camera (not all of it gets light on it) and also the film edge



A is an area of reflection (probably from the back of the film holder)
B is the edge of the negative
C is the edge of exposure on the film

I had said that I did not expect to see that edge B because normally it is not visible. To see it means to me the strip of film was short and did not fill the holder (which is also a mask to cover up the sprocket holes)

Now I normally like to understand what I'm doing, but I realise that others (probably the vast majority of others) have no such interest.

Below is a segment of 35mm negative film. It was scanned by simply laying it on the glass and scanning as positive



From this you can see the areas of the film which the camera has exposed and the areas which are left between during film advance. These are important to see (if you want to do things well) as this is your film base. This represents the least dense (thinnest) area of your image and sets your lowest level of image ... you will notice that this is substantially darker than nothing ... meaning that even with NO LIGHT reaching the film, the scanner will see quite some density.

Unlike slide film the area with no exposure is "clear" (discounting the base density shown above) and the area with brightness is darkest (also called densest)

Now "proper" exposure is getting useful amounts of your image between these two regions.

For example this represents what you will see looking at the histograms of:
-fully exposed negative
-totally unexposed negative
-well exposed image

all overlaid and made clear.



You want to get the subject you are exposing within that .. preferably in the middle of it where its linear in responce

You may wish to read this page of mine. Sure its main thrust is about using a digital camera to determine exposure, but I'm sure there are some good points in there for understanding what exposure is, and how it relates to what is on film and what can be scanned from it. I say this because your previous description of exposure led me to believe you have some areas of unclarity. Perhaps this will help, as I believe that you can't understand exposure with film untill you understand the relationship between light in and the density obtained.


you can learn lots from looking at film this way and you can learn more about your scanning (and get better results) by using your scanner in positive at all times and doing things post processing later. you will never get to know about this using the 'negative' setting and thumbnails.