stevierose

ColorPerfect (Color Neg) takes the linear scan from Vuescan and applies negative "profiles" for specific films to it to produce a positive color image. I will then take this image and do a BW conversion using one of many tools (color channels, Silver Efex Pro, etc.). I actually was aiming this question at anyone who is familiar with ColorPerfect regarding whether I need to tweak the process of making the color positive if the intention is to then convert to BW. Thanks!

Hello

I am shooting mainly Kodak Portra 400 film. My intention is to scan it with a Nikon 4000 ED scanner using Vuescan to create raw linear scans and ColorPerfect ColorNeg to produce the color image. I plan to convert some of the photographs to black and white.

 

My question to you is: If my intention is to ultimately convert the image to black and white are there any special considerations or settings I should use when I do the initial processing of the raw vuescan file in ColorPerfect before converting to black and white using one of the established techniques in Photoshop? As of now my workflow will be: scan the negative to a linear Vuescan file, process he file using ColorPerfect, and then convert the file to black and white. Is there a better way to do this (outside of using a silver BW film or chromogenic BW film).

 

Thanks!

<p>I know that you are asking about which scanner to buy, but, I think that part of the problem you state is related to the pro labs you use. I would suggest you check out the following labs: 1. Indie Film Lab; 2. Richard Photo Lab, or 3. North Coast Photographic Services (you can google these). They all offer high quality film development and high resolution scans at a very reasonable cost. As an example, Indie Film Lab charges $15 for dip and dunk film processing of 120 film and large high quality scans that are color corrected and done by a human and $18 for their extra large scans. C41 or BW film. They charge around 3 bucks to scan an existing negative. They use state of the art Fuji and Noritsu scanners. Richard Photo Lab charges slightly more, and NCPS is about the same. All these places are way into service and doing a great job with film. You can send your film to them in a Priority Mail small flat rate box for about $5, and download the scans to your computer. So I guess it depends on how much film you shoot and who much time you want to spend in front of a computer and scanner. At these prices, I'd rather let someone who is great at it handle this for me. </p>

<p>Personally, I would find one of the compact rangefinders from the 70's: <br>

http://cameraquest.com/com35s.htm<br>

You can likely find something like an Olympus 35 RC for next to nothing and then pay to have a CLA and adjustment so that it can use a modern battery instead of the old mercury cell. Light, compact, sharp lens, you will enjoy using it. </p>

<p>I have been using computers since I took Fortran programming at college in 1971 (big stacks of punch cards...). My view: a computer is a tool. I replace the computer when it will no longer perform the tasks that I need it to perform within a timeframe/ease of use that I find acceptable. Most recently that cycle seems to run every 3-4 years. <br>

I use PCs at work and Macs at home. I wish that Apple still offered mid-price tower computers. They allowed a lot more flexibility when it came to upgrades, which allowed me to keep them longer. If a new I/O standard came in (Firewire instead of SCSI, USB 2 instead of USB) you could just pop a new card into a slot, and voila you had a computer with Firewire or whatever. Not so with iMacs and Mac Minis. To get that flexibility now I would need to buy a Mac Pro which is just too expensive. Perhaps Apple's market research tells them otherwise, but I think that a mid-priced tower would still sell well to photographers and other graphic artists. </p>

<p>Given your needs I would suggest that you shoot RAW files and purchase DXO Optics Pro 6.5 software. Then just batch process your files using the automatic pre-sets in the software and send the resulting files to the lab to be printed. This software does offer the ability to do lots of custom adjustments and tweaks to images, but, I would say that just using it's automatic processing pre-sets it produces very nice files at least 80% of the time with no tweaking required on your part. It comes with modules for your camera and many lens combinations. You will need to learn what size, resolution, and color space your lab needs to produce the prints you want, but otherwise this is about as automated a process as possible and will produce much better photos than your in camera JPEGS. I think you can download the software and use it for free for a month to see if you like it.</p>

<p>The other thing you will need to learn is how to achieve proper exposure for your digital files. Exposure for digital files is much more like shooting slide film than negative film, you have to be careful that you don't blow out the highlights. To do that all you have to do is learn how to read the histogram that your camera can show you for each shot, and expose the shot so that the histogram almost touches the right side without being chopped off. That is called "exposing to the right" which you can google or look up in any basic digital photography how-to book. If you can learn to expose your photos in RAW without blowing out the highlights and then batch process them in DXO Optics Pro I bet you will be happy with the results most of the time. I don't have any ties to DXO, my suggestion is based upon my experiences with many programs and the question that was asked. </p>

<p>To those who may criticize this suggestion I will say that I am adept at post-processing files in PS with many techniques and approaches, but I am trying to answer Kingley's question, and using DXO Optics Pro is as closed to an automated approach as there is while still achieving very good output most of the time. Not as good, perhaps, as learning to be a photoshop master, but pretty good--probably good enough to satisfy Kingsley's needs. </p>

<p>Dave Easterwood of Dave's Camera in Chelsea, Michigan does a great job with these cameras and is quite reasonable:<br>

http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00TQfG</p>

<p>Why worry? Insure your cameras before you leave and enjoy yourself. As a previous poster mentioned, most homeowner's insurance allow for a rider that is called "Inland Marine" Coverage (not sure why) that covers the insured item against pretty much any kind of loss. It is inexpensive. I once accidentally dropped a very expensive Canon L lens halfway down a cliff in Yellowstone Park, and it was covered. This, of course, is exactly what insurance is for--to protect you against loss due to a low probability but expensive event. </p>

<p>http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/01/large-large-format.html</p>

<p>I have a similar situation when I go fly fishing. The answer to your question depends upon what your real concern about taking the 5D is. If you find carrying that big of a body/lens combination to be inconvenient or awkward (that is definitely true when I am wade fishing) then the solution is to bring a small high quality point and shoot instead. You can get a waterproof point and shoot if you wish, though there are few that offer much photographic control or RAW files. I now carry a Canon S95 for this purpose. It is not waterproof, so if I do drop it in the river it will be a lost cause, but it costs much less than a 5D, it easily fits in a secure pocket within a baggie, it shoots RAW files and has a great deal of photographic control. So the risk of damaging the camera is low and the cost of losing it is not terrible.<br>

However, if you don't mind the size of the 5D and your main fear is that one day you may slip and fall into the water with the camera--I would suggest that you take the 5D and acquire two things: 1. A good water proof photo pack such as those made by LowePro, and 2. Insurance. I am surprised that no one has mentioned insurance yet. If you are not a professional photographer, you can get a rider on your homeowner's (or renter's) insurance called "inland marine" coverage for a very nominal fee that will cover the actual replacement cost of your camera equipment no matter what happens to it. I once accidentally dropped a Canon 300mm/f4 L lens halfway down Yellowstone Canyon, and it was replaced under my policy. Ask your insurance agent about it. </p>

<p>I have heard good things about Spectrum Photo in Berkley, Michigan:</p>

<p>http://www.spectrumfoto.com/film.html</p>

<p>Hi Everyone- <br /> <br /> I'm going to be going to Costa Rica in a few weeks (beach and the Monteverde Cloud Forest) and next fall I'm going to be going on a Photo Safari in S. Africa. I am a former Canon shooter, but my favorite travel camera now is my e620. I mainly use my 14-54 3.8-3.5 ver I lens, but on these trips I will need telephoto and macro lenses. I think I will get the 50 mm macro. Which telephoto zoom should I get? The 50-200 seems the most likely, though it also seems like it will be very heavy with the e620. Any suggestions? Should I also consider Sigma or other lenses?<br /> <br /> Thanks!</p>

<p>This is sad news. I gave one of Al's prints of a very young Bob Dylan (with chubby cheeks!) and Joan Baez playing together to my Dylan loving older sister, and it occupies a place of honor on her wall. I don't know if many of you folks remember, but their was a T shirt with Al's curmudgeonly photo (cigarette hanging out of mouth) on the front sold via this site a number of years ago. Every time I have ever worn it people have given me the strangest looks and asked "Who the hell is that guy, and why is he on your T shirt??". Tonight I will put it on and drink a toast to old Al. </p>

<p>Marissa-<br>

In my opinion there is no doubt that Lynda.com is the way for you to go for video tutorials. $25 for a month of unlimited classes is really a pretty good deal. Imagine if your college offered you that! They do offer a 7 day free trial of access to their tutorials. You can find it <a href="http://www.lynda.com/promo/freepass/Default.aspx?lpk35=197">here</a>. If you are disciplined you can easily go through the Lightroom course in a week (maybe during Christmas break?). Then if you find it works well for you, you can pay the 25 bucks to sign up for a whole month. <br>

Good luck!</p>

<p>The manual for the Contax T2 can be viewed for free on line here:<br>

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/contax/contax_t2/contax_t2.htm<br>

According to the manual the T2 sets ISO automatically using the DX coding on the film cannister between the ISO range of 25-5000. A film cannister without DX coding will be automatically set to ISO 100. The camera does have +/- 2 stops of exposure compensation available. Therefore, assuming that Delta 3200 has DX coding on the cannister, just load the film into the T2 and add plus one stop of exposure compensation to achieve the same effect as ISO 1600. I would suggest running a roll of film through the camera at these settings to check things before you go on your trip.<br>

Hope that this helps!</p>

<p>Ben Schaefer was the first to contact me at 9:22PM, and the Shade is on its way to him!</p>

<p>I have a new unopened "Shade" accessory for Leica M (Lutz Konermann) that needs a new home. I sold my M6TTL long ago, and never used it. I will send it to the first person who emails me, for free. I will send it in a first class mail envelope within the USA. If it doesn't arrive for some reason, sorry, not my problem! </p>

<p>Thanks, Les. I'm sorry to be such a scanning newbie, but when you say "fully automated neutral scans" what software are you using with your scanner? Are using a particular film term included with the software (such as "generic" or "Supra 400") or some other means of neutralizing the orange film mask/cast?</p>

<p>To Les:</p>

<p>As you are enthusiastic about Ektar 100 can you share with me (or point me to a previous post) about the best way to scan it? I have a Minolta 5400 II scanner as well as Vuescan and Silverfast SE Plus software. I am an experienced photographer and competent with Photoshop, but I am new to scanning. Any tips would be most appreciated by me. Same for Kodak 400UC.</p>

<p>Thanks!<br /> Steve</p>

<p>After a few years of using only digital cameras, I long to use some of my older rangefinders. I will be using a hybrid workflow where I will shoot c41 color film and then scan the "keepers" into my computer where I will be adjusting contrast, color, sharpness, etc. digitally before printing. If this is the case, does it really matter which film I use for capture? I realize that different films have different grain structure and other physical characteristics, but if I am going to be adjusting contrast, saturation, etc, digitally, do I really gain anything by using pro films, or one pro film versus another? <br>

In this sort of hybrid workflow, which ISO 100 and 400 films do you think would work best? I have a Minolta Scan Elite 5400 II scanner and own both Vuescan and Silverfast SE Plus software, however I am new to scanning and would prefer to keep the scanning process as straightforward as possible. I note that neither Silverfast nor Vuescan have built in film profiles for 400 UC and Ektar 100 which seem to be frequently recommended on PN for this purpose. Do I need to produce my own profiles for these films if I want to scan them?<br>

Thanks!</p>

<p>Thanks, Larry! =-)'</p>

<p>When I heard that Kodak 400 UC might go out of production a year or so ago I went around to the local Walmart and bought a half dozen three packs of the film and put them in plastic bags in my refrigerator where they have remained. At the time Walmart sold those three packs for about ten bucks. I recently decided to put aside my digital gear and shoot film for the summer. The oldest expiration date on the boxes is August 2008. What is the likelihood that the outdated film is still good?</p>

<p>Anyone using the FA 28/2.8 lens on a digital body? I am very fond of the 40mm FOV as my "normal" lens.</p>

<p>Thanks for your prompt responses, they are most helpful. I am quite likely to take advantage of the FA and DA primes. The 40 mm DA pancake and the 28mm/2.8 FA lens look very appealing to me. I likely will also get a wide to moderate zoom, it looks like there are a number of choices there varying in speed and range somewhat. I will have to get busy learning about these lenses. I'm no newbie to photography or to photo.net, but I am new to Pentax digital SLRs and lenses. I hope that you will tolerate the occasional question as I get further into this. I am most appreciative.</p>

 

<p>Hello folks! This is my first time posting on this forum. The K7 announcement has be considering switching from Canon to Pentax. I almost switched when the K20D came out but was dissuaded when I found many posts on this forum complaining about the unavailability of Pentax lenses, and how slow Pentax was at the time in bringing previously announced lenses to market. Before I go through the effort of selling my Canon gear and buying the K7, can you advise me as to whether or not those problems are still going on, and if so, how bad they are?<br>

Thanks!</p>