CF Systems ColorNeg

Has anyone here tested CF Systems ColorNeg Photoshop plug-in with scanned film?

It's supposed to work very much like using CC filters in a color darkroom. Any

comparisons of your old workflow vs. ColorNeg?

 

I plan to test it a bit in the coming weeks - I would appreciate educated

opinions, not like the thread I found from 2006:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HK4d

I wouldn't regard CMYK (i.e., CC filter equivalents) as an improvement to the usual RGB work flow in Photoshop. I doubt there is a simple correlation to the filter stack on a conventional enlarger, which must compensate for the enlarger itself in addition to the negative. Frankly, Photoshop has all of the tools I need in this regard, along with calibration, to make transportable image files.

Edward - I'm looking for opinions from people who have actually used CM Systems ColorNeg software. As it is, you are posting an opinion with no data or experience to back your assertion.

I downloaded the demo and used it with my Minolta MultiScan Pro. The Minolta software is useless for scanning negs hence my interest. If you have a lot of different types of negatives then it could save a lot of time. As for me I standardized on just one type of neg (Fuji Reala) so my Photoshop action gave me the same results as his plugin. So I didn't buy it.

 

Jim

Thanks, Jim. I'll be scanning a lot of my father's old negs. Many film types across 50 years of shooting.

I'm sort of in the same boat as Jim Hein: just downloaded the demo and am trying it out. My main motivation was less than satisfactory highlight detail, when I try to scan as a slide and invert scans myself. CFSystem describes Photoshop invert as a linear process, and says this is not what you need to do.

 

I'm experimenting with some Fuji Reala, shot in daylight with a grey card in most of the shots. It seems to be giving me very good skin highlight detail, and the grey cards are coming out neutral. Kodak Gold25 seems a nice choice for profile, regardless of the film being Fuji.

 

FYI, I'm getting my "linear" scans via Minolta Scan Utility with my Scan Elite 5400, following the procedure CFSystems describes for acquiring the file with my scanner:

 

Scan as slide, auto exposure on, and output 16 bit linear.

 

The one alarming thing is the spikes at both ends of the histogram. I've tried it with black and white neg scans, and not sure if I like the results, looks to be a lot of posterizing in the highlights, could be my settings though.

I've been using it a lot lately, and it's by FAR the best way to scan/correct negative film that

I've found so far, though admittedly I haven't tried everything. They just did a major revision

to it as well.

 

It still takes some time/skill to get the hang of it. My tip is to pick a neutral/colorless area

carefully and then apply that setting to the whole roll. But it works. Cheap enough...

Mendel - have you checked your Gamma setting? It should be set to 1.0 to get a linear scan.

Could someone post a sample NepPos processed scan and compare it to another faster

method they've been using.

 

I have yet after all of these years hearing about that site seen anyone post a sample.

No samples? See what I mean.

Here's a sample crop of 35mm Fuji Pro 800Z scanned on a Nikon 9000. I'll post others soon.<div></div>

One more 35mm with Fuji Pro 160S.<div></div>

One more for the archive - this German web site has a nice demonstration. Just click on the blue text to toggle the photo between the linear scan and edits made in Photoshop or ColorNeg. It works very well!

 

http://www.colorneg.de/oldneg.html?lang=en

Great shots, Robert.

 

Now could you just post versions of these shots rendered with the default convert to positive settings in the Nikon scanner driver

without using ColorNeg so we can compare the results between the two?

 

Got your email BTW reminding me of your updated postings.

I'll do more scanning later this week.

 

I really like the work flow using ColorNeg. A 16-bit linear scan captures all of the information that's available, so I shouldn't ever need to rescan (unless I made an error). I just plow through the scans and leave all of the editing until later. I can always go back to the original scan and re-edit if needed.

Just a screenshot of the Nikon preview within the scanner software would suffice. You don't have to follow through on the scan.

Forgot to add just make sure you assign your monitor profile to the screenshot and convert to sRGB and post.

I'll do the scan too, since digging out the neg takes the most time.

I've rescanned the second image as a negative using Nikon Scan. I couldn't get the colors even close.<div></div>

I added a lot of red to the Nikon Scan image. I even tried to set his shirt as neutral, which is what I did with ColorNeg. I did want an overall warmth to the photo, ans I don't think I achieved it with Nikon Scan. Perhaps someone with greater proficiency could do better.

Yep! Typical neg scans I get on my Epson flatbed using Epson Scan. That indescribable sickly cyan tint permeating throughout

the entire image like some kind of undercolor. It's like a bad stain you can't get completely rid of even using Bon Ami type edits.

Screws up the image's color table.

 

You've sold me on ColorNeg with this one. Thanks, Robert, for taking the time to post these results. Much appreciated.

Glad to help, Tim. The plug-ins are very inexpensive - particularly when you balance the cost against the output.

 

Sorry that it took me so long!

Tim - make sure that you scan as a positive and set gamma = 1.

ColorNeg corrections behave just like the color filters that I used when printing in a darkroom. I haven't seen anything that works as well.

Can anyone compare this to the VueScan workflow described here? Is it noticeably better? http://benneh.net/blog/index.php/2008/04/21/better-colour-neg-scanning-with-vuescan/