[artobest]

I'm using the unexposed film base to set my black point, so by default nothing within the frame will/could possibly end up on the left side of the black point.

Only initially; if I read your original post correctly, you tinker with the black point later. Histograms in scanner software are quite imprecise - I think it's safest to back off your black point and set it properly later, when you have better tools to evaluate it.

[Swift1]

Only initially; if I read your original post correctly, you tinker with the black point later. Histograms in scanner software are quite imprecise - I think it's safest to back off your black point and set it properly later, when you have better tools to evaluate it.

I did tinker with the black point later, but also explained that I move the black triangle back to where it was before.
Yesterday, I played around with using the method that you recommended, and it definitely has it's merits. I had a tough time with getting good color balance after inverting though, but I imagine practice would help.
Also after all said and done, I couldn't see any real significant improvement one the final image, compared to the same image scanned my normal way.
Scanning as a positive has the benefit of being able to return to an unadulterated source file and re-processing, without rescanning, if you're unhappy with your initial results.

Here are my best efforts using each method.

[stevebrot]

As with most things, if something isn't working for you then you need to find a different method. For me currently, my method is working for me.

That is who counts, right?

I diverge from artobest on several points as well, but am generally happy with my results.


Steve

[Ranchu]

Thank you for sharing your method!

I wanted to mention, you can scan at 48 bits and still save as a jpeg. That's what I do. I've compared the outputs, and the '48 bit' are definately better than the 24 bit ones imo.

[Swift1]

Thank you for sharing your method!

I wanted to mention, you can scan at 48 bits and still save as a jpeg. That's what I do. I've compared the outputs, and the '48 bit' are definately better than the 24 bit ones imo.

Did you test that using the same negative and same settings? Jpeg is only able to save 24bit data, so scanning at 48 bit and saving as a jpeg shouldn't yield results any different than scanning at 24 bit.
I tested it and as far as I can tell there is no difference between scanning at 48 bit and 24 bit and saving as a jpeg.

[Ranchu]

Did you test that using the same negative and same settings?

Well, of course.

[Swift1]

Well, of course.

Just curious
I have tried your suggestion a few times, but I can't see that it's is better. I have found that scanning as a 48 bit TIFF file, then later convert to 24 bit jpeg in PS will give better results.

[Ranchu]

No doubt. I scan a bit differently than your method here, so that might account for it. However, it does cost nothing to set it at 48..

[LesDMess]

I wanted to mention, you can scan at 48 bits and still save as a jpeg. That's what I do. I've compared the outputs, and the '48 bit' are definately better than the 24 bit ones imo.

I notice in ACDSee that they have a 48bit JPEG format. I am not sure if this is a standardized format or proprietary to this application only but it does save out 48Bits. These files are smaller than the original 48Bit TIF I get from my original scans. Is this how your 48Bit JPEG files are saved?

Or do you scan at 48Bits and save as regular JPEG in 24Bit?

[Swift1]

I notice in ACDSee that they have a 48bit JPEG format. I am not sure if this is a standardized format or proprietary to this application only but it does save out 48Bits. These files are smaller than the original 48Bit TIF I get from my original scans. Is this how your 48Bit JPEG files are saved?

Or do you scan at 48Bits and save as regular JPEG in 24Bit?

AFAIK, Epson Scan doesn't have the ability to output 48 bit jpeg.

[Ranchu]

Yes, they're definitely saved as regular 24 bit jpegs. I set the main controls to scan at 48 bits, but save regular jpegs. The only way I know how to use a piece of software is to to push all the buttons on and off and see what happens, so that's what I do...eventually...Epson Scan is very good software imo.

Your picture of the field and sky is quite beautiful btw, swift1.

[LFLee]

While it's always interesting to see other people's working methods, your workflow concerns me for several reasons. First, and this may simply be a matter of preference, you are scanning as colour negative. This will cause your scanner driver to bake in a tonal response curve that, in my experience, is rarely desirable. Scanning as positive and inverting in Photoshop gives a more linear tonal response and, in my opinion, greater latitude for editing. You will need to set black and white points individually for each colour channel, which effectively eliminates the orange mask and provides a good basis for further tweaking in Photoshop or Lightroom, with their more advanced controls.

Secondly, you are scanning in 8-bits. This is a bad idea on several counts, not least because it reduces your leeway for post facto editing - you risk banding if you subsequently make colour or tonal adjustments in the finished scan. Solution: scan in 16-bits (ie 48-bit colour) and resave as 8-bit later if you really need to save space.

Thirdly, you are clipping the blacks in your scan. The black point should never intrude on the histogram as you show, since all the picture information to the left of it will be irretrievably cut from the scan. If you want deep, dark blacks, you can do that later with a non-destructive adjustment layer or Lightroom edit.

Lastly, saving as jpeg instead of tiff means you'd better be damn sure that your scan is perfect when it comes off the scanner, because any future saves will inevitably degrade the file.

Of course, there is another conversation to be had here about whether it is best to do as much as possible pre-scan, but I believe that scanning as 16-bit positive gives you the best of both worlds.

would definitely love to know your method of scanning, it would benefit the community if you can write a step-by-step tutorial like Colton did....

Please share your method when you have time!

[Swift1]

Your picture of the field and sky is quite beautiful btw, swift1.

Thank you

[Swift1]

I decided to move this entire article to my personal website.

It can now be found here,
Scanning Color Film | Photography by Colton Allen

[baro-nite]

Website looks great!