madNbad
Well-known
I've been camera scanning negative for a while now and the question is, do you try to set the capture exposure beforehand for as little manipulation in post as possible, sometimes over exposing by a lot or do you go with the indicated proper exposure and make your adjustments in post processing?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
The poll answer options are a bit too simplistic for me.
I've been scanning negatives using all sorts of different methodologies, as the technology has evolved over the years, since 1984. In the first 5 years of that time, it was work that I did for NASA/JPL as part of my job using machinery that was frighteningly expensive and complex, and for basically science/forensic data gathering. I started applying effort to scanning film for my photography/art uses about 1994, first with scanning setup I constructed myself out of a flatbed scanner, and later with a dedicated negative scanner. Over the 25 years since, I've now moved to doing all my scanning/digitization work via a copy camera approach.
I'm of the camp that says "scanning should retrieve as much data from the original as possible to allow for best rendering flexibility and range." In other words, I don't try to produce finished work when scanning, I try to capture the entire dynamic range and detail available in the original and leave the finish rendering work to post-scan processing. This does mean that I adjust the capture exposure to suit the negative on a per negative basis to keep saturation of highlights in range and put some effort to getting the black point within reach of correct, but I don't spend a lot of effort to adjust color temperature or other curves at the time of scanning. I capture all negatives in a session at the same, fixed color temperature so that I can apply basic white balance corrections to all in one motion, later tuning the white balances and tonal curves on a per exposure basis. Sometimes no further adjustment is required after scanning, but that's rare. Most of the time, an optimized rendering takes a bit more adjustment.
You are welcome to drop that into either of the poll answer categories you provided, as you like.
G
I've been scanning negatives using all sorts of different methodologies, as the technology has evolved over the years, since 1984. In the first 5 years of that time, it was work that I did for NASA/JPL as part of my job using machinery that was frighteningly expensive and complex, and for basically science/forensic data gathering. I started applying effort to scanning film for my photography/art uses about 1994, first with scanning setup I constructed myself out of a flatbed scanner, and later with a dedicated negative scanner. Over the 25 years since, I've now moved to doing all my scanning/digitization work via a copy camera approach.
I'm of the camp that says "scanning should retrieve as much data from the original as possible to allow for best rendering flexibility and range." In other words, I don't try to produce finished work when scanning, I try to capture the entire dynamic range and detail available in the original and leave the finish rendering work to post-scan processing. This does mean that I adjust the capture exposure to suit the negative on a per negative basis to keep saturation of highlights in range and put some effort to getting the black point within reach of correct, but I don't spend a lot of effort to adjust color temperature or other curves at the time of scanning. I capture all negatives in a session at the same, fixed color temperature so that I can apply basic white balance corrections to all in one motion, later tuning the white balances and tonal curves on a per exposure basis. Sometimes no further adjustment is required after scanning, but that's rare. Most of the time, an optimized rendering takes a bit more adjustment.
You are welcome to drop that into either of the poll answer categories you provided, as you like.
G
Doug A
Established
I only shoot black & white film. I scan negatives as RAW files with the camera set for auto exposure and auto HDR. The resulting image is nicely centered in the histogram with no clipping at either end.
For most images the only post processing I do is set the file type to 16-bit monochrome, invert the image and move the black and white points to the respective ends of the curve in the levels.
It took a while to find a combination of film, ISO, developer and developing time that often lets me get away with no additional processing.
For most images the only post processing I do is set the file type to 16-bit monochrome, invert the image and move the black and white points to the respective ends of the curve in the levels.
It took a while to find a combination of film, ISO, developer and developing time that often lets me get away with no additional processing.
markjwyatt
Well-known
I voted for "close", but with the caveat that I mainly scan B&W, some color slides, and some attempts at color negative (not happy with these).
madNbad
Well-known
Here's a little clarification. Currently, I'm only scanning B&W negatives that are developed at home. I try to be careful with my meter readings and lately have been using the tiny Reveni Labs meter. I have a Sekonic 308x and in reflective mode it matches the Reveni quite closely but the Reveni has an angle of acceptance of about fifty degrees. My images could be overexposed leading to a denser negative. The captures are in RAW and converted using RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders. The best success I've had so far is exposing the capture at +2 EV. This gives me an image when inverted is fairly close to the original scene with little manipulation. I have tried some of the auto settings on the Sony but end up with overexposed captures which need quite a bit of work. Like many things in photography it's both a learning process and subjective. Mostly I'm curious about how others approach the process.
charjohncarter
Mentor
When I was digital camera scanning I did exactly what Godfrey does/did. I do the same with scanning get all the information possible, and then go to editing.
MJ Buckpitt
Well-known
+1 for Godfrey
Dogman
Mentor
I went for "close". But I don't scan color negatives and I'm willing to adjust everything as necessary in Lightroom. It's a pretty simple process actually.
punkzter
Established
I have my camera setup for auto-exposure and raw images.
css9450
Mentor
Cyriljay
Leica Like
I used to do lot of scanning. Some medium Square formats.
I used a hired Blad scanner from a studio. My first lot of scanning was optimised according to the person how indicated me the settings. But Now I know most of the scanning is out as the work was done DONE ON AUTO SHARPNESS BASE. So I am sure I must have done them all Zero Auto sharpness plus zero sliders .
You may think that adding more tuning on a master file will lead to a better quality and more options on a file. It is a wrong thought in Digital photography.
If you have a scanner and negative ,it not a problem.All you need is time, then you can put more time on a favourite shot and do lot of variation on a scanning and could compare all photos/ prints for learning the process.
I think it is the best option to do this on a medium format negative and on hi-Res scanner.
I used a hired Blad scanner from a studio. My first lot of scanning was optimised according to the person how indicated me the settings. But Now I know most of the scanning is out as the work was done DONE ON AUTO SHARPNESS BASE. So I am sure I must have done them all Zero Auto sharpness plus zero sliders .
You may think that adding more tuning on a master file will lead to a better quality and more options on a file. It is a wrong thought in Digital photography.
If you have a scanner and negative ,it not a problem.All you need is time, then you can put more time on a favourite shot and do lot of variation on a scanning and could compare all photos/ prints for learning the process.
I think it is the best option to do this on a medium format negative and on hi-Res scanner.
madNbad
Well-known
The Pro Mount MK 2 plate arrived and the Negative Supply scanning setup is complete. With the plate in place, I'm able to set the exposure than add 1 EV and get great results with a minimum amount of fussing. Rescanned a few negatives that had been done with earlier equipment and have been surprised how much more detail I getting now.
Negative Scanning Setup
Negative Scanning Setup
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Looks good!
G
G
madNbad
Well-known
Three grand worth of gear to scan the negatives from my two hundred dollar camera.
(OK, there is a M4 close at hand)
(OK, there is a M4 close at hand)
Godfrey
somewhat colored
LOL! I don't even want to think about how much money I've spent on the gear I use for scanning film and instant film prints.
I have more film cameras than digital cameras, although I make more photos with digital cameras. I use the digital cameras that I use for scanning for lots of other things as well...
But I understand completely...
G
Ronald M
Mentor
Color balance on mask. Indicated exposure is usually a nicely centered histogram
Skip first step for monochrome.
Invert in photoshop with curves. Use levels to have histogram reach close to ends.
No special programs needed.
Skip first step for monochrome.
Invert in photoshop with curves. Use levels to have histogram reach close to ends.
No special programs needed.
charjohncarter
Mentor
Here is a comparison that I did today of both types of scans. The film was Technical Pan (read the description):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/carter3john/51383529742/in/dateposted-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/carter3john/51383529742/in/dateposted-public/
madNbad
Well-known
Thanks, John, that's quite a comparison between the flatbed and the camera scan. I appreciate the knowledge of the photographers who have been using this method from the early days of digital and building their own kits trying to find out what works. Mostly, mine will be used for B&W, nothing more than my own enjoyment but I may get a slide holder...
charjohncarter
Mentor
Like you it is just for my own enjoyment. I still feel if I ever became serious about this method I could improve upon it. The camera I am using now is a mirrorless digital which is screen focus which is fine as it has focus peaking. But I still feel that alignment is critical, and that is something that can be lost during a 'scanning' session.
madNbad
Well-known
We live in a small house and space is limited. My scanning bench is also my wife's craft table so a portable unit is essential. Most of the Negative Supply equipment is well engineered but there are always shortfalls. The adjustable feet on the Pro Riser have no provision for locking them in place and the screw they adjust on are a little too short to let the cord for the Light Source slide under the legs of the stand without bunching or binding. I added longer screws and nuts. The longer screws give added height and the nuts lock the feet in position so I'm not realigning the stand every time I use it. Now the base stays level and it's just a quick adjustment of the camera at the beginning of the scan. I learned about alignment the hard way, so I always check it.