Different result between scanning in Epson's “color negative film” mode and scanning in positive ->...












1















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







New contributor




reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    1















    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







    New contributor




    reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.























      1












      1








      1








      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







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      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







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 3 hours ago









      reddyreddy

      82




      82




      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          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.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. 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
            2 hours ago











          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
          });


          }
          });






          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          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









          3














          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.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. 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
            2 hours ago
















          3














          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.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. 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
            2 hours ago














          3












          3








          3







          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.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. 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.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. 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 2 hours ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          WayneFWayneF

          10k1924




          10k1924













          • 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
            2 hours ago



















          • 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
            2 hours ago

















          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
          2 hours ago





          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
          2 hours ago










          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















          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

          Masuk log Menu navigasi

          Identifying “long and narrow” polygons in with PostGISlength and width of polygonWhy postgis st_overlaps reports Qgis' “avoid intersections” generated polygon as overlapping with others?Adjusting polygons to boundary and filling holesDrawing polygons with fixed area?How to remove spikes in Polygons with PostGISDeleting sliver polygons after difference operation in QGIS?Snapping boundaries in PostGISSplit polygon into parts adding attributes based on underlying polygon in QGISSplitting overlap between polygons and assign to nearest polygon using PostGIS?Expanding polygons and clipping at midpoint?Removing Intersection of Buffers in Same Layers

          Старые Смолеговицы Содержание История | География | Демография | Достопримечательности | Примечания | НавигацияHGЯOLHGЯOL41 206 832 01641 606 406 141Административно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области«Переписная оброчная книга Водской пятины 1500 года», С. 793«Карта Ингерманландии: Ивангорода, Яма, Копорья, Нотеборга», по материалам 1676 г.«Генеральная карта провинции Ингерманландии» Э. Белинга и А. Андерсина, 1704 г., составлена по материалам 1678 г.«Географический чертёж над Ижорскою землей со своими городами» Адриана Шонбека 1705 г.Новая и достоверная всей Ингерманландии ланткарта. Грав. А. Ростовцев. СПб., 1727 г.Топографическая карта Санкт-Петербургской губернии. 5-и верстка. Шуберт. 1834 г.Описание Санкт-Петербургской губернии по уездам и станамСпецкарта западной части России Ф. Ф. Шуберта. 1844 г.Алфавитный список селений по уездам и станам С.-Петербургской губернииСписки населённых мест Российской Империи, составленные и издаваемые центральным статистическим комитетом министерства внутренних дел. XXXVII. Санкт-Петербургская губерния. По состоянию на 1862 год. СПб. 1864. С. 203Материалы по статистике народного хозяйства в С.-Петербургской губернии. Вып. IX. Частновладельческое хозяйство в Ямбургском уезде. СПб, 1888, С. 146, С. 2, 7, 54Положение о гербе муниципального образования Курское сельское поселениеСправочник истории административно-территориального деления Ленинградской области.Топографическая карта Ленинградской области, квадрат О-35-23-В (Хотыницы), 1930 г.АрхивированоАдминистративно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — Л., 1933, С. 27, 198АрхивированоАдминистративно-экономический справочник по Ленинградской области. — Л., 1936, с. 219АрхивированоАдминистративно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — Л., 1966, с. 175АрхивированоАдминистративно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — Лениздат, 1973, С. 180АрхивированоАдминистративно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — Лениздат, 1990, ISBN 5-289-00612-5, С. 38АрхивированоАдминистративно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — СПб., 2007, с. 60АрхивированоКоряков Юрий База данных «Этно-языковой состав населённых пунктов России». Ленинградская область.Административно-территориальное деление Ленинградской области. — СПб, 1997, ISBN 5-86153-055-6, С. 41АрхивированоКультовый комплекс Старые Смолеговицы // Электронная энциклопедия ЭрмитажаПроблемы выявления, изучения и сохранения культовых комплексов с каменными крестами: по материалам работ 2016-2017 гг. в Ленинградской области