Why is VueScan -still- so crap? (terrible neg clipping)

[dan_lee16]

<p>On a V500 here, and VueScan x32 9.0.18<br>

VueScan is often clipping the shadows and both the shadows and highlights.</p>

<p>Eg, I got some Pro 400H in front of me.</p>

<p>Model has black hair, all contrast and detail in the hair is gone, clipped. Does not matter what settings I use in VueScan, even with no colour balance, and locked to minimum exposure.</p>

<p>This isn't a problem with the film. The detail is on the film just fine.</p>

<p>It also isn't a problem with the scanner density.</p>

<p>If I preview it in Epson Scan, I dont even have to expand the levels, the detail is there - quite comfortably in the preview.</p>

<p>VueScan is clipping it, and I can't do a single thing about it, gone through everything. It's not even that thin if Epson Scan is picking it up without having to expand the levels.</p>

<p>Previewing each, R, G, B channel on the colour tab shows every single channel is flat black in her hair. Happens to highlights ocassionally as well.. ones that Epson Scan pick up comfortably with expanding the density range too far.</p>

<p>Colour correction is shockingly bad.</p>

<p>If Epson Scan had multipas-scanning to get rid of a lot o the noise for editing and for thin-ranged and also dense negs, and IR-dust removal as good as Epson Scan I wouldn't bother trying anything else.</p>

<p>The RAW histogram doesnt appear to show any clipping.. what gives.. if I change the type to slide.. there appears to be detail there.. let me say my negs are completely normal :/.. never the less I should be able to decide where the clipping is.</p>

<p>But this is a real deal breaker :(</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>If it's 'so crap' why do so many people suggest using it instead of the standard software?</p>

[dan_lee16]

<p>Useful responses only please.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

<p>I agree with Dan's opinion and that is why I use SilverFast AI scanning software. </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Would a carpenter blame his hammer for bending a nail?</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<blockquote>

<p>if I change the type to slide</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ok, so "Pro 400H" is a color negative film.</p>

<p>Taking it step-by-step, first: what have you got set for:</p>

<p>Input|Media</p>

<p>And:</p>

<p>Color|Negative Vendor<br />Color|Negative brand<br />Color|Negative type</p>

<p>Also:</p>

<p>Color|Curve Low<br />Color|Curve Low<br />Color|White Point<br />Color|Black Point</p>

<p>Also:</p>

<p>Input|Bits per pixel<br>

(and bits per pixel on your output)</p>

[dan_lee16]

<p>Edward: Epson scan doesn't clip it. I dont even need to expand the levels, because everything on the neg is in the usual place.</p>

<p>Mendel: I've gone through everything, nothing has an effect on the clipping. Repeat, nothing. I even scanned as a positive at various exposure lock settings and correction settings (includin"none"), and it's still actually clipped once I get it into photoshop and look at properly.</p>

<p>Clipping is a deal breaker. You should be able to set your own cut off points anyway.. this program has been out long enough..</p>

<p>The only reason I want to use VueScan is for A) Multi-pass scanning (awesome for a scanner like V500 that has horrid SNR) and B) The IR-dust removal, it does very well for itself, still leaves artefacts, not so bad though like Epson Scan does.</p>

<p>All I want is reasonable 120 scans to display, given the difference between single and multipass results, noise but not grain has been an issue, any excellent images I can pay to have done on a Imacon. I'm going to try the SilverFast demo.</p>

<p>I could use Epson Scan to scan a few times to files, then chuck those into a photoshop stack..really going to the effort though :/</p>

[peter_mounier]

<p>I agree that VueScan can clip the blacks. The best setting for no clipping is the Kodak interneg setting. Of course it's profiled for interneg film, so you will probably have to adjust the colors manually in PS or elsewhere, but it includes all of the data in the film. I know you said you've tried all of the settings, but I've had success with it. At the risk of making you sound like a broken record, have you tried Kodak Interneg for film type?</p>

<p>Peter</p>

 

[dan_lee16]

<p>Currently scanning with Silverfast demo.. it looks perfect. Profiles actually seem to be right too. Except infrared dust cleaning dosnt seem to be there....</p>

<p>I'll have another look after this is finished, I've the 'none' (which is supposed to include everyhing), manual and various profiles.</p>

<p>Just looked... doesnt -say- its clipped black.. but it still looks like an area of flat colour.. green now instead of flat black, though after importing a scan does seem to be more detail than before, just not all of it, I think. Well it'll have to do for now anyway.</p>

<p>Silverfast seems only to have SRD not iSRD for my scanner.. or maybe thats the demo.. wow. Or perhaps I'm missing something. Going to call it a night.</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>Have you got the latest version? Try that. And save your old install, just in case. Also, try setting everything to defaults:<br>

Pulldown File|Default options<br>

Then reset as you like by hand, not from an ini file.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

<p>Flat looking scans are actually your friend : they mean you've pulled as much out of the film as possible.</p>

[dan_lee16]

I'm on 9.0.18 as noted in the opening post, which is the current version.

 

Yep, except when in VueScan using the tools to try and compensate for clipping makes ridiculously flat scans, while still clipping. There's a hard cut in the software.

 

AS opposed to in Epson Scan, where this detail is actually there, without expanding the levels to a flat contrast, IE: it's not a huge contrast range of detail that I'm scanning, it's deciding to clip regular detail, in Epson Scan, detail is there, while being contrasty, I can expand the levels for a flat picture, but there is no more data, just empty histograms space, both dMin to dMax was contained in the smaller histogram area, expanding it more is a waste of bit space in the file.

 

None of the profiles or settings or exposure work against clipping because they apply post-cliping. Except the internegative profile as one user pointed out, software there is still some loss on the "severe" negatives (the negs are great themselves, no messing around in epson scan to see the detail, its not clipped while still being contrasty.

 

 

The interneg profile however is working (it appears) for less "severe" negatives (ones where the clipping in vuescan is of smaller contiguous area rather than larger).

 

 

This is a band-aid approach and prevents you from using colour correction or the colour profile of your film, VueScan has been around for a long time... this really isn't acceptable.

 

 

However turn sharpening on with the interneg profile... it changes the colour.. and goes back to clipping... changes the colour on all profiles by the look too.. sharpening shouldn't do that.. that is really broken and unfunctional.

 

Software thats being sold thats been around for so long should at least function and have it's basic functions actually working.

 

This is a dedicated film scanning program and doesn't let you even control where the clipping cut-off occurs for all those other profiles either. Disgraceful.

 

 

Well, the software still works a lot better than Epson scanners do at being film scanners :/ probably time to invest more $

 

 

 

At least on the plus side the IR dust removal in VueScan is the best I've seen, it's not all bad, I haven't tried that Silverfast HDRi stuff.. I don't think it's quite appropriate to have to buy a second program and transfer into that after to do your dust removal for film scans though.

[mendel_leisk]

<blockquote>

<p>it's still actually clipped once I get it into photoshop and look at properly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What file format(s) are you saving, what bit rate?</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>Hi Dan,</p>

<p>First a question, why pejorative description of VueScan in your subject line? Although VueScan is not perfect (no software is), it hardly deserves the description of "Crap". The English language contains over 600,000 words. I am sure you can find a better one to describe you fustration with, or your inability to properly use, VueScan.</p>

<p>That written, have you reported your problem to Ed Hamrick, the author of VueScan? <a href="http://www.hamrick.com/sup.html#q">http://www.hamrick.com/sup.html#q</a><br>

Mr. Hamrick takes a great interest and pride in his software. I have found he responds to his e-mail and makes corrections quickly. I wish other software vendors were as responsive.</p>

 

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>Useful responses only please.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You know, OPs don't get to select their responses. I thought the answer was highly relevant. I've used VueScan for years on many different scanners, usually in preference to the OM software, and never had any such problem as yours. You do need to learn how to tweak the settings.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why is VueScan -still- so crap?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd say that if only "<em>useful original posts</em>" were allowed, you'd be out by now. With that kind of attitude what sort of responses do you expect, anyhow? Read the manual and play with the settings, and I expect that you will find the solution is there in the version you already have.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Dan, I too could not make that software work when I first used it. I am an IT director and am used to dealing with highly technical issues every day. If I could not figure it out, it can't be that good.</p>

<p>Months go by and I grew a little wiser on scanning. I tried it again, and boy was I impressed with what it can do. Years later and I am still impressed. It is a truly versatile product.</p>

<p>My point here is that there is a steep learning curve with getting a good scan in general. It takes time. The fact that Vuescan is a highly rated scanning software should indicate there is something to it.</p>

<p>I like the software because it let's me take control over the whole work flow; which also means it's my fault when something does not go according to plan and there are other factors than the software at play. It's not something to use for point-click-scan type activity. I think if you take the time, you will get rewarded with consistent results.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Neither Epsonscan, Vuescan nor Silverfast will clip blacks (whites, or whatever) unless you are using it incorrectly. The dynamic range of negative film is just over 5 stops (off the film), the DMax about 3.x and the clear areas (which become blacks in the scan) decidely orange (i.e., not clear) - well within the capacity of an Epson scanner. If you turn all of the automatic adjustments off except exposure, the scans will be flat and definitely not clipped. Start from that point and make adjustments until you get something more pleasing (or do it in Photoshop).</p>

<p>That said, scanning is harder than it looks. It is definitely a challenge, but one worth mastering. If you want something easier, get a DSLR.</p>

<p>To reiterate and rephrase, don't blame your hammer if you are bending nails ;-)</p>

[indraneel]

<p>Vuescan is not for the faint hearted, on the other hand it does seem to be able to do everything.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I got some Pro 400H</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You might be better served with some thing other than Vuescan. Look to vuescan if you get a <em>lot</em> of film that you're having trouble with other software.</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>I've been using the Epson program with my V600 which is really the same as the V500. I don't think it clip blacks or whites. </p>

<p>How can a scanner clip anything? The most it can see is white/white (255) and black/black (0). If you have a completely black area (such as off the film shot) or a completely white area, you'll get that as the most from the scanner. It seems to me that either the film is clipped in the original, or you're clipping the results because of your changes to the the black and white points in levels. Vuescan or whatever program is shifting the levels causing the clipping.</p>

<p>Try scanning flat and adjust in post. </p>

[steve_unsworth1]

<p>Learn how to set the black/white points, know what they mean, and then realise that if the image is being clipped it's because you don't know what settings to use.</p>

[zack_zoll]

<p>Alan, scanners do indeed have a dynamic range, and anything beyond that range registers as clipped highlight/shadow. Most scanners have a single exposure setting, and then digitally alter the exposure levels. Some will actually expose the film longer as an enlarger might; these are much more expensive, and also much less prone to clipping.</p>

<p>I'm still hung up on the OP's original question. It reminds me very much of when I was trying to learn to drive a stick shift, and I asked my father why so many people liked standard transmissions when they were harder to drive and not as smart as a computer. But now I get it. Unless the scanner is actually faulty, the problem is probably you.</p>

<p>Judging from my own experiences, the problem is that Dan doesn't understand that because of the difference in exposure between a scanner and an enlarger, a 'correctly exposed negative' does not always make a correctly exposed scan. When I shoot 400H I rate it at 200, or even 100 when using studio lights. This gives me very dark negatives, which result in very light scans. After setting black points appropriately, I get an image with significantly more tonal range and fewer clipped or blown-out areas than if I had exposed my film the "correct" way.</p>

<p>The moral of the story is that using a scanner creates a new process, and requires you to shoot differently. I've even switched my black and white developer to Rodinal, as it produces a much better scan than other developers I've used. Back when I was using Perceptol and shooting at box speeds, my scans were much more contrasty and much worse. Same scanner, but they look great now.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>Vuescan (latest) generally produces results comparable to Nikon Scan 4.2, although the colors differ a little. I usually set color balance to "none." <br>

Frankly, I'm not sure why someone would complain about software that costs less than $40.</p>

[chrisnielsen]

<p>To the OP: Under the advanced workflow section of the users' guide for Vuescan, there are details on how to lock the exposure. You need to follow that or you will not get anywhere near the best results for negative film. You didn't mention that in your post so I can only assume from that, that you are not doing so. You're pretty much wasting your time trying to get good results from it if you don't lock exposure. It goes like this:</p>

<p>Preview the film, select the area *between* frames, and click Lock Exposure.<br>

Preview again, this time select Lock Film Base Color.<br>

Resize your selection and scan your film. </p>

<p>While we're at it, to get good colour I choose Auto Levels under the WB section, once you've got the exposure locked it seems to do a good job with colour.</p>

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Some good tips here that I will happily try them out myself & which would have come up a lot sooner if the thread had simply been titled "How do I avoid clipped blacks/highlights in Vuescan?".</p>

<p>It definitely is quirky software but I paid the 40 bucks 4 years ago and consider it money very well spent. In the meantime I moved up to higher spec film scanner models 3 times, switched to faster computers twice and moved from Windows through two successive OSX versions, never encountering any trouble moving between VueScan versions and never having to pay extra along the way. Rather different from almost any other for-profit photography related software I know of, where you can expect to spend at least $50 a year upgrading to newer versions just to keep up with newer OS releases etc.</p>

[pierrearnaud]

<p>Like many others here, I would say that probably the way you use the software is at fault rather than the software itself. I have scanned in the 500+ films with vuescan with excellent results : bw mostly, but also some color negs and a few slides. <br>

Check out your basic settings. To have a flat contrast curve, you need to have bottom curve set to 0.25 and top curve to 0.75 (i'm translating from the french version, so I hope the English terms are the same). To increase contrast, you increase the bottom value and decrease the top value (for instance 0.3 / 0.6 will yield higher contrast than say 0.28/0.70).<br>

Also check out your white point and black point settings : both should be initially set to 0. <br>

When scanning color negs with vuescan, my process is as follow :<br>

1. Under the color tab, I choose the color neg from the list of available films.<br>

2. I set black and white points to 0 and curve 0.3/0.7, luminosity : 1.0, color balance : white balance.<br>

3. I scan one image from my strip, choosing one that best averages the overall conditions of all pictures from the neg. At that point, the resulting scan is anything but clipped : on the contrary it is generally very flat. I adjust luminosity and curve and white point. To get the right level of contrast I usually have to move the white point up a bit. <br>

4. When color balance needs correction, I usually control-click on a neutral area of the image.<br>

5. I save the resulting settings then scan the rest of the film using the saved settings as a starting point and fine tuning for each image.<br>

These settings are with a coolscan 5000. You may want to ask people using vuescan with the V500 what their settings are. <br>

Hope that helps. All of the pictures in my gallery here are scanned with viewscan. I have never really had an issue with clipping. If all fails, contact Hamrick. He's known for being dedicated and responsive. <br>

Personally, I wished all the software I bought delivered as much, for such a reasonable price as Vuescan. It would make my life easier !</p>