A few suggestions for Vuescan - Ed please note

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

1. Could we please get a setting "none" for the film profiles, since
they are of no use to man nor beast, anyway. I'm trying to get
decent colours out of Agfa Optima 200 and not a single one of those
profiles produces usable results. The opposite: each one messes up
another colour/shade.

2. Would it be possible to hide settings like "monitor profile",
"printer profile" etc.? They're changed once a year at the most and
only cause unneccessary clutter on the screen. The same goes for
things like "show IT8 outline".

3. I'd find it quite helpful if settings like red/green/blue brightness
could be marked by something in the relevant colour to make it
easier to find them without actually having to 'read' through the
labelling.

4. Would it be possible to have "prevew" as one of the selectable button
actions?

Ralf

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

1. Could we please get a setting "none" for the film profiles, since
they are of no use to man nor beast, anyway. I'm trying to get
decent colours out of Agfa Optima 200 and not a single one of those
profiles produces usable results. The opposite: each one messes up
another colour/shade.

Even the generic one? You might want to try and manually tweak the
filmbase color first.

2. Would it be possible to hide settings like "monitor profile",
"printer profile" etc.? They're changed once a year at the most and
only cause unneccessary clutter on the screen. The same goes for
things like "show IT8 outline".

My monitor profile is different each time I recalibrate the monitor,
or different viewing conditions require to switch between profiles.
The scanner profile changes with each fim type used. The printer
profile changes for each different type of paper (if one uses VS for
prints).

Bart

 

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Even the generic one? You might want to try and manually tweak the
filmbase color first.

Generic is just another inappropriate film profile, i.e. that of some
old Kodak Gold emulsion.

Those profiles have been made for scanning (with a particular Kodak
equipment) films processed in a particular (supposedly Kodak) chemistry.

Any instance of them working with any other combination of
hardware/film/chemicals is a matter of pure coincidence. And, yes, I've
known for a few years how to get my filmbase colour right. No use if
some random profile messes up the colours again, right afterwards.

Ralf

 

[Ed Hamrick]

Generic is just another inappropriate film profile, i.e. that of some
old Kodak Gold emulsion.

Actually, the Generic setting uses a linear sensitometric
curve, which makes the result relatively insensitive to the
film base color. This is what makes it work well with a wide
range of exposures.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

 

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Actually, the Generic setting uses a linear sensitometric
curve, which makes the result relatively insensitive to the
film base color.

"If so, try using the Generic film setting. This should approximate
the colors from a 1-hour Photo (it's a generic Kodak Gold 100 setting)."
(Ed Hamrick on 1999/07/15 in rec.photo.digital)

"Using the generic setting in VueScan (which is actually
just the Gold 100 setting) is probably best if you can't find
a matching line in the help file." (Ed Hamrick on 1999/10/21 in
comp.periphs.scanners)

So, what is it?

Ralf

 

[Ed Hamrick]

"If so, try using the Generic film setting. This should approximate
the colors from a 1-hour Photo (it's a generic Kodak Gold 100 setting)."
(Ed Hamrick on 1999/07/15 in rec.photo.digital)

"Using the generic setting in VueScan (which is actually
just the Gold 100 setting) is probably best if you can't find
a matching line in the help file." (Ed Hamrick on 1999/10/21 in
comp.periphs.scanners)

So, what is it?

It uses the Gold 100 colors for the film dyes and a linear sensitometric
curve. I added the linear sensitometric curve some time after these
postings in 1999.

Regards,
Ed Hamrick

 

[Wilfred]

It uses the Gold 100 colors for the film dyes and a linear sensitometric
curve. I added the linear sensitometric curve some time after these
postings in 1999.

Thus, by applying the 'advanced workflow' to determine the orange mask,
one can eliminate all the built-in Kodak-based presets? Or is 'colors
for the film dyes' more than just the orange mask?

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

Ed Hamrick wrote: SNIP

Thus, by applying the 'advanced workflow' to determine the orange mask,
one can eliminate all the built-in Kodak-based presets? Or is 'colors
for the film dyes' more than just the orange mask?

I interpret it as using the absorption characteristics of the dye-set
used for Kodak Gold film. The film-base color is assumed to have
minimal dye density (besides the yellow/orange mask which thus *will*
have an influence). That would not work as well on Fuji or other brand
films.

It screams for a user made film profile, which may have limited
accuracy for color negative film.

Bart

 

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

which may have limited
accuracy for color negative film.

Which would mean that a setting to let me get rid of those obsolete and
totally intransparent Kodak settings would be something I'd definitely
like to play with.

Ralf

 

[Wilfred]

Which would mean that a setting to let me get rid of those obsolete and
totally intransparent Kodak settings would be something I'd definitely
like to play with.

Amen to that!

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

Which would mean that a setting to let me get rid of those obsolete and
totally intransparent Kodak settings would be something I'd definitely
like to play with.

I don't follow. Those settings are useful for those films. I have
several film types from more than 25 years ago, and am likely to run
into others when I start digging in other people's archives. The
settings I don't need, don't bother me.
It's more the ones that are not there that do, as I believe is your
real issue.

To me, it would seem to be a more productive discussion to figure out
how to achieve that what is missing...

Bart

 

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

It's more the ones that are not there that do, as I believe is your
real issue.

Not at all. I haven't met a single film profile in Vuescan that would
really work with the film it's meant for. Usually, the 'correct' one is
even among the least appropriate.

And the reason for that is that they've been made for a particular
hardware that we all don't have and presumably a few more conditions
(e.g a particular make of chemicals) that we can't match.

Mind you, those of us who have still printed colour in a conventional
darkroom have produced decent prints with nothing but an exposure timer
and three controls for C, M, and Y on the enlarger head.

On average, I spend more time today trying to get the colours of any
single scan right than I did when I was printing conventionally in the
olden days.

I'm beginning to wonder if all this profiling business and automatic
wizardry isn't rather a curse than a blessing.

That's why I'd like to be able to defeat the lot of it if I wish to do
so.

That clear? Fine.

Ralf

 

[Mark L Caton]

Not at all. I haven't met a single film profile in Vuescan that would
really work with the film it's meant for. Usually, the 'correct' one is
even among the least appropriate.

And the reason for that is that they've been made for a particular
hardware that we all don't have and presumably a few more conditions
(e.g a particular make of chemicals) that we can't match.

Mind you, those of us who have still printed colour in a conventional
darkroom have produced decent prints with nothing but an exposure timer
and three controls for C, M, and Y on the enlarger head.

On average, I spend more time today trying to get the colours of any
single scan right than I did when I was printing conventionally in the
olden days.

I'm beginning to wonder if all this profiling business and automatic
wizardry isn't rather a curse than a blessing.

That's why I'd like to be able to defeat the lot of it if I wish to do
so.

That clear? Fine.

Ralf

But when it works, which it does more times than not here, one might regard
it as a necessary evil. Like having to get your chemicals to the right
temperature, and keeping them there.

Mark

 

[Bart van der Wolf]

Not at all. I haven't met a single film profile in Vuescan that
would really work with the film it's meant for. Usually, the
'correct' one is even among the least appropriate.

Odd, that's not my experience...

And the reason for that is that they've been made for a
particular hardware that we all don't have and presumably
a few more conditions (e.g a particular make of chemicals)
that we can't match.

Not really. They have originally been made for the production of Kodak
PhotoCD Imagepac files. The scanner that was used in the PhotoCD
Imaging Workstation (PIW) was profiled just like one would profile
another scanner (with an IT8 target), and the chemicals were obviously
for the Kodak C41 and E6 process. So it all boils down to the dye set
interacting with the lightsource and the filtered CCD, and correcting
for the non-linear film response curve, i.e. basic profiling for color
management.

Mind you, those of us who have still printed colour in a
conventional darkroom have produced decent prints with
nothing but an exposure timer and three controls for C, M,
and Y on the enlarger head.

Been there, seen it all, done it all.
I still have my Durst with dichroic filter colorhead and a Componon
and Rodagon lens.
Color was fine untill I broke my Kodak Color thermometer ;-)

On average, I spend more time today trying to get the colours of any
single scan right than I did when I was printing conventionally in the
olden days.

There are many more variables involved with digital, but I think the
time spent and repeatability have improved (don't forget the test
exposures and different filter step strips required the same
processing time as the final print).

I'm beginning to wonder if all this profiling business and automatic
wizardry isn't rather a curse than a blessing.

That's why I'd like to be able to defeat the lot of it if I wish to do
so.

I think nobody contests that. K.I.S.S. has a huge appeal, but
sometimes fails to produce the required result.

That clear? Fine.

Yes, that's why I prefer to master the process, rather than have the
process mastering me. That requires controlling the variables, through
process control and colormanagement.
Which still raises the question, why doesn't the process (apparently)
produce the required result, and how can it be improved?

1. After inverting the image for negatives, the Black point settings
must neutralize the film base color. VueScan allows to do that on the
Raw linear gamma data with the filmbase color options.
2. Color response for various neutral gray exposure levels must be
rendered with the 'color' of the lightsource (direct and/or
reflected/filtered). That requires setting the White point and channel
gammas. The gammas also adjust for the assumed monitor gamma.
3. Specific interaction between the lightsource, film dyes and CCD
filters, requires saturation control which is easiest if a profile is
available (it also solves remaining non-linearities in the film
response curves).
4. Colorbalancing and tonescaling, which is a matter of taste and
creativity.

Without step 3, step 4 becomes very difficult, even if steps 1 and 2
were performed correctly.

Bart

 

[Bill Tuthill]

Odd, that's not my experience...

Nor mine. Most of the time, an older-film profile works great for
that older film, and newer films of similar manufacturer and type
also scan acceptably with related old profiles.

Portra 400UC, now called Ultra Color 400, works well with either
Royal Gold 100 or 400, depending on your cyan preference.

However, there is no good profile for new NPH 400, as far as I know.

From a practical standpoint, I really don't care about Konica or
Agfa films (except Ultra 100) nowadays, but NPH is a bugaboo.