Velvia 16 bit tiff scans: Lightroom or PS?

Discussion in 'Digital Darkroom' started by arnabdas, Sep 22, 2009.

  1. Curious to know what you all prefer for editing tiff scans of Velvia slides -- Lightroom or Photoshop?
    Some of my scans are of dark colored early morning dewy subjects and exposed for the highlights, so the dark areas are pretty dense (not blocked, but very dense). The biggest challenge is to extract enough shadow details without losing "punch".
    I am wondering if PS will continue to be the best solution or if investing in lightroom will reward me with additional opportunities.
    As a backgrounder here's my scanning workflow -- I scan 16-bit linear (I use double-exposure for the dense slides) with input space= built-in and output space = Device RGB then I open in photoshop and assign Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II (Posi Linear) profile then do a perceptual conversion to ProphotoRGB.
    From this point onwards, is there anything that Lightroom could do (to extract shadow details and processing in general) that photoshop could not)?
    To reiterate (and to prevent the thread from veering off-track) -- this is not a general LR vs PS question. Instead -- this question is specifically regarding relative usability of LR vs PS as far as processing dark/dense slide scans are concerned.
    Appreciate any insights! Thanks
     
  2. digitaldog

    digitaldog Andrew Rodney

    From this point onwards, is there anything that Lightroom could do (to extract shadow details and processing in general) that photoshop could not)?
    To reiterate (and to prevent the thread from veering off-track) -- this is not a general LR vs PS question. Instead -- this question is specifically regarding relative usability of LR vs PS as far as processing dark/dense slide scans are concerned
    Since the scans are not Raw and not linear encoded, no, there’s not much difference in terms of what you can process here. The advantage of LR is all the edits are metadata and applied in the best order. That means you can use that processing engine and until you export the data, you’ve got less overhead than using say adjustment layers with pixels. But in terms of getting “more data” to work with on shadows, no, its not the same as providing Raw data to LR to handle the demosicing process on linear encoded data.​
     
  3. I don't think there's anything that Lightroom can do that Photoshop cannot, but Lightroom has very good tools like fill light and its general color correction tools which work well for most images and are quicker (and take up less disk space) that doing it via layers in Photoshop. If you've got two or more scans of a similar scene and can transfer edits from one to another I'd say Lightroom is a huge advantage over Photoshop for saving time.
    Personally I use a similar scanning workflow to you and after I assign the profile (batch this in PS) I import the files into Lightroom for further refinement these days. I do things much faster than when I had a PS only workflow (even with custom actions I created).
     
  4. Just for anyone not in the know: "16 bit linear" is a Minolta scanner software expression, and essentially means the file is gamma 1.0 (as opposed to something like 2.2), and it's histogram has been left as-is, not adjusted.
    Arnab, you might try using those files in a Vuescan scan-from-disk workflow. This was what I did, with close to 2000 slides, using the Minolta Scan Elite 5400.
    You will need the Vuescan "Pro" license to do this (worthwhile, in any event). Here's some info:
    http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc14.htm#topic11
    In the above, you simply sub. your 16 bit linear file for the Vuescan Raw File. Works the same. I would suggest scan-from-disk with the input tab setting:
    Input|Image
    You can also try:
    Input|Color Slide
    And if you do the latter I'd suggest profile (in the Color Tab):
    Color|Generic Color Slide
    Any of the other profiles seem pretty horrible ;)
     

Share This Page