Different result between scanning in Epson's “color negative film” mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?What are the differences between Epson v330/300 and Epson v500 scanners?What is a reasonable file format for film scanning?Batch processing/retouching scanned film with severe artifactsIs there any good method to invert a negative image (duplicated with a digital camera) in Lightroom?Process Silverfast color raw scans in LightroomHow to invert color negative “scan” via DSLR without clipping the red channel?Scanner for uncut medium format film?Best practices for scanning chromogenic black-and-white film?Remove orange filter from scanned negativeScanning negative 35mm: color accuracy, color balance, film bias

Can I interfere when another PC is about to be attacked?

How is it possible for user's password to be changed after storage was encrypted? (on OS X, Android)

Compute hash value according to multiplication method

A newer friend of my brother's gave him a load of baseball cards that are supposedly extremely valuable. Is this a scam?

Is there a familial term for apples and pears?

whey we use polarized capacitor?

N.B. ligature in Latex

Draw simple lines in Inkscape

Pronouncing Dictionary.com's W.O.D "vade mecum" in English

What makes Graph invariants so useful/important?

Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?

Is there really no realistic way for a skeleton monster to move around without magic?

Why CLRS example on residual networks does not follows its formula?

Is it tax fraud for an individual to declare non-taxable revenue as taxable income? (US tax laws)

I see my dog run

Are tax years 2016 & 2017 back taxes deductible for tax year 2018?

What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?

What would happen to a modern skyscraper if it rains micro blackholes?

Download, install and reboot computer at night if needed

XeLaTeX and pdfLaTeX ignore hyphenation

Simulate Bitwise Cyclic Tag

When blogging recipes, how can I support both readers who want the narrative/journey and ones who want the printer-friendly recipe?

Possibly bubble sort algorithm

Why is "Reports" in sentence down without "The"



Different result between scanning in Epson's “color negative film” mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?


What are the differences between Epson v330/300 and Epson v500 scanners?What is a reasonable file format for film scanning?Batch processing/retouching scanned film with severe artifactsIs there any good method to invert a negative image (duplicated with a digital camera) in Lightroom?Process Silverfast color raw scans in LightroomHow to invert color negative “scan” via DSLR without clipping the red channel?Scanner for uncut medium format film?Best practices for scanning chromogenic black-and-white film?Remove orange filter from scanned negativeScanning negative 35mm: color accuracy, color balance, film bias






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








3















When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










share|improve this question






















  • Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

    – LuZel
    Mar 28 at 7:36

















3















When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










share|improve this question






















  • Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

    – LuZel
    Mar 28 at 7:36













3












3








3








When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










share|improve this question














When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?







scanning negative-film scanner epson






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Mar 27 at 22:47









reddyreddy

182




182












  • Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

    – LuZel
    Mar 28 at 7:36

















  • Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

    – LuZel
    Mar 28 at 7:36
















Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

– LuZel
Mar 28 at 7:36





Could you give us two sample pictures so we can easier see the difference and find a solution faster? also what Epson scanner are you using and which software version?

– LuZel
Mar 28 at 7:36










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















6














Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



That is speaking of color negatives, they are the special problem. Positive slides or prints or B&W negatives don't have the orange mask, so then other copy methods than scanning are not ruled out (but scanners are still good too).



The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. But it will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






share|improve this answer

























  • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

    – reddy
    Mar 28 at 0:08






  • 2





    have to say... great answer

    – osullic
    Mar 28 at 9:16











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "61"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106213%2fdifferent-result-between-scanning-in-epsons-color-negative-film-mode-and-scan%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









6














Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



That is speaking of color negatives, they are the special problem. Positive slides or prints or B&W negatives don't have the orange mask, so then other copy methods than scanning are not ruled out (but scanners are still good too).



The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. But it will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






share|improve this answer

























  • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

    – reddy
    Mar 28 at 0:08






  • 2





    have to say... great answer

    – osullic
    Mar 28 at 9:16















6














Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



That is speaking of color negatives, they are the special problem. Positive slides or prints or B&W negatives don't have the orange mask, so then other copy methods than scanning are not ruled out (but scanners are still good too).



The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. But it will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






share|improve this answer

























  • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

    – reddy
    Mar 28 at 0:08






  • 2





    have to say... great answer

    – osullic
    Mar 28 at 9:16













6












6








6







Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



That is speaking of color negatives, they are the special problem. Positive slides or prints or B&W negatives don't have the orange mask, so then other copy methods than scanning are not ruled out (but scanners are still good too).



The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. But it will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






share|improve this answer















Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



That is speaking of color negatives, they are the special problem. Positive slides or prints or B&W negatives don't have the orange mask, so then other copy methods than scanning are not ruled out (but scanners are still good too).



The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. But it will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Mar 28 at 17:14

























answered Mar 27 at 23:10









WayneFWayneF

10.1k1924




10.1k1924












  • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

    – reddy
    Mar 28 at 0:08






  • 2





    have to say... great answer

    – osullic
    Mar 28 at 9:16

















  • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

    – reddy
    Mar 28 at 0:08






  • 2





    have to say... great answer

    – osullic
    Mar 28 at 9:16
















Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

– reddy
Mar 28 at 0:08





Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

– reddy
Mar 28 at 0:08




2




2





have to say... great answer

– osullic
Mar 28 at 9:16





have to say... great answer

– osullic
Mar 28 at 9:16

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106213%2fdifferent-result-between-scanning-in-epsons-color-negative-film-mode-and-scan%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Adding axes to figuresAdding axes labels to LaTeX figuresLaTeX equivalent of ConTeXt buffersRotate a node but not its content: the case of the ellipse decorationHow to define the default vertical distance between nodes?TikZ scaling graphic and adjust node position and keep font sizeNumerical conditional within tikz keys?adding axes to shapesAlign axes across subfiguresAdding figures with a certain orderLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themAdding axes labels to LaTeX figures

Tähtien Talli Jäsenet | Lähteet | NavigointivalikkoSuomen Hippos – Tähtien Talli

Do these cracks on my tires look bad? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowDry rot tire should I replace?Having to replace tiresFishtailed so easily? Bad tires? ABS?Filling the tires with something other than air, to avoid puncture hassles?Used Michelin tires safe to install?Do these tyre cracks necessitate replacement?Rumbling noise: tires or mechanicalIs it possible to fix noisy feathered tires?Are bad winter tires still better than summer tires in winter?Torque converter failure - Related to replacing only 2 tires?Why use snow tires on all 4 wheels on 2-wheel-drive cars?