Using Scanner Software

<p>I've recently gone back to using film having just inherited a Bronica S2 and a Linhof Master Technika IV and bought a V700 to scan the negatives. I have to admit that I've been struggling a little bit getting good results using Silverfast ai and the Epson scanning software. Having experimented quite a bit I've suddenly found that I get the best results just doing a straight scan with the Epson utility with no adjustments of any kind applied to the scan but all the further processing done in Photoshop as I would do with my digital raw files. Am I right in thinking that any adjustments made in the scanner software has no bearing on the way the negatives are scanned but is a form of post processing, the unprocessed scan in essence being the equivalent of a digital Raw file? If that is so why do people use scanner software? Surely that's like trying to process a picture in your camera when you could use a much more powerful program like photoshop.<br>

I've done a search on this forum and read many debates on people's use of scanner software for medium format film so I must be missing something somewhere. Should I persevere with Silverfast or the Epson utility or can one abandon them altogether and do no processing at the scanner end.<br>

I would be really grateful for any advice on the matter before I spend many more hours going in the wrong direction.</p>

<p>No, you're right.<br>

Scanning software controls are usefull only in as far as they controls hardware settings. And apart from possibly setting a signal amplifier, there is little they do. Most 'features' are software post-processing thingies.<br>

So doing as little as possible using the scanning software, using a grown-up tool like Photoshop to do whatever needs to be done afterwards, is the right way to approach scanning.</p>

 

<p>Thanks for that, I just needed some reassurance that I would still be using the scanner to it's full potential without using any scanner software.</p>

<p>You are basically right, but there is another option I would recommend which makes the distinction between scanning and post-processing clearer, and gives more useful control over both. I used the Epson software with my Epson 4990 (and previous Epson 3200) for some years and was quite happy with it. Then I tried Vuescan and now use it exclusively. Vuescan has several advantages over the Epson software, including the ability to do multi-read scanning (up to 16x) and built-in downsampling - that is, I scan at 4800 dpi but save the output at 2400 dpi, which is where the 4990's optical resolution really peaks. Both of these features improve the hardware signal to noise, by 4x and 2x respectively, for a net gain of 8x. This makes the scan reach deeper into the dense areas (slide shadows and negative highlights).</p>

<p>In the context of your question, another great feaure of Vuescan is its ability to save film "RAW" files in DNG format, including the ICE IR channel; these DNG files can then be quickly passed through Vuescan again with different post-processing choices and output file types and resolutions, without the need to set up the film and go through the slow scanning phase again and again; alternatively, I understand that you can feed them into any other DNG-friendly post-processing software. The basic idea behind the DNG files is "scan once, process as many times and ways as you like" - analagous to digital camera RAW capture.</p>

<p>Vuescan's ability to store and recall the complete range of option settings for different films/formats is also better than Epson's.</p>

<p>I scan 4x5 at original size and 2400dpi (my scanner is a little older and can't really give me much more at a higher setting). The only time I do adjustment is if an area is blocked up (either too bright or too dark), which happens about 1 in 5 negatives or transparencies. Then I'll use the lightness control. Sometimes I even make another scan and merge the adjusted one together, sort of like HDR, I guess.</p>

<p>Most of the scanner processing is done after the fact, but before the image is transmitted to the computer. It can save a lot of time if you get a decent scan up front. The closer you get, the less adjustment you need later, and you avoid running out of adjustment "room" once you are committed to a TIFF file.</p>

<p>An interesting alternative is to use Silverfast AI in the HDR mode. This results in the equivalent of a RAW file just as it comes from the scanner. You can then use Silverfast HDR to finish the results, using the same controls available in Silverfast AI. The difference is that you can try various scenarios without degrading the HDR scan. The settings you derive can be applied in real time the next time you scan.</p>

<p>Another vote for VueScan. Sometimes the newest version, and they come very regularly, can be a little flakey but if it is, it's fixed real soon. Supports scanners that haven't been made in decades as well as the latest thing. Often, maybe even usually, much better than the original software.</p>

<p>I am only a satisfied user, and I have no financial or other ties to VueScan whatsoever. It's just so nice to have something that works so well.</p>

<p>I own an Epson V750 which I used for 645, 6X7 and 6X9 scans for awhile. Like you, I just did a basic scan and then used Photoshop to get what I wanted out of the images. <br />I eventually bought a Nikon CS9000 and the Epson is now just used for 4"X5"s, but I still do all of the adjustments in Photoshop.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I really appreciate everyone's contributions and now have a much clearer understanding as how to proceed with regards scanning my negatives. I've invested in VueScan for it's ability to scan and save to DNG raw format. Special thanks to Ray Butler for pointing out this featue.</p>

<p>The most important setting in the scan process is to insure that the scanner exposure gives the best histogram possible. This will make all subsequent editing easier. If all your film is properly exposed, then you won't have to alter this much, if at all, unless you have special cases like night photography, etc.</p>