Tweaking VueScan: Loss of Shadow detail

[Alan Smithee]

Problem: I do my "Advanced Workflow" to eliminate base + fog and orange mask
in Vuescan. (colour neg)
My RGB exposure comes out at approximately1.617. No color compensation. When
I compare the same negative scanned with EpsonScan I have way more leg room
on the dark end of the histogram. Is the Advanced Workflow too optimistic?

 

[Alfonso]

Problem: I do my "Advanced Workflow" to eliminate base + fog and orange mask
in Vuescan. (colour neg)
My RGB exposure comes out at approximately1.617. No color compensation. When
I compare the same negative scanned with EpsonScan I have way more leg room
on the dark end of the histogram. Is the Advanced Workflow too optimistic?

Sounds similar to my problem scanning darker paper photos!

Alfonso

 

[Alan Smithee]

Sounds similar to my problem scanning darker paper photos!

Alfonso

This is with negatives though. I tried manually cutting the exposure to
..5 -- still burning out the details in the shadows. Even when I use
VueScan's automatic mode it muddies up my shadows. I have no room to move
with my black point when I'm in PhotoShop levels. I'm sure there's something
I'm doing wrong but I don't know what. I've tried changing my Exposure
Clipping value from .1 to .01 to 0.0 nothing seems to work.

 

[Bruce Graham]

This is with negatives though. I tried manually cutting the exposure to
.5 -- still burning out the details in the shadows. Even when I use
VueScan's automatic mode it muddies up my shadows. I have no room to move
with my black point when I'm in PhotoShop levels. I'm sure there's something
I'm doing wrong but I don't know what. I've tried changing my Exposure
Clipping value from .1 to .01 to 0.0 nothing seems to work.

Are you using a really clear area to set your mask value? Are you
scanning with 0,0 black and white points (as a starting point)? This
should ensure that you can adjust each channel in PS with levels.

 

[Alan Smithee]

Are you using a really clear area to set your mask value? Are you
scanning with 0,0 black and white points (as a starting point)? This
should ensure that you can adjust each channel in PS with levels.

When Color is set to "None" I don't have access to the Black Point. When I
choose any other color setting my Black Point seems to be set to .173!!!
HUH?!

 

[Alan Smithee]

Are you using a really clear area to set your mask value? Are you
scanning with 0,0 black and white points (as a starting point)? This
should ensure that you can adjust each channel in PS with levels.

Nope I still don't get it. As soon as I look at my red channel and start
moving the black point in photo shop while holding the alt key my black
points are already being clipped. I've tried Manual, Neutral, White Balance,
and Auto Levels. When I scan the same neg in EpsonScan the Shadows don't
start clipping until I hit about 20 on the input scale. I can even see the
clear area of the negative coming into frame with Epson Scan. So what's
going on. I still haven't a clue. I even tried deleting my Vuescan INI and
starting over. Scanner is an Epson 3200.

 

[Don]

When Color is set to "None" I don't have access to the Black Point. When I
choose any other color setting my Black Point seems to be set to .173!!!
HUH?!

The root of the problem is the convoluted VueScan's (so-called) user
interface. It's an unnecessarily complex "web" of conditionalities
between different settings. A totally unrelated value on a completely
different panel may be "secretly" influencing your setting. Often,
this other value on the other panel may not even be displayed!

When I tested VueScan a couple of years ago such "puzzles" were a
regular occurrence. Apparently, not much has changed since then...

The author appears to have lost track of these connection which is why
his "cure-all" advice is to nuke the INI file and start from scratch,
but that's only temporary as the problems inevitably creep back in.

The only (relatively) "safe" VueScan use is, well... to avoid changing
the settings. :-/ Or use more reliable and straightforward software.

Don.

 

[kolwicz]

As Don says, VueScan is rather complex, but I have not found the kinds
of problems the original poster describes when scanning color negs with
VueScan and my WindowsXP-based Minolta ScanMulti Pro.

It is true that sometimes one channel will be much darker than the
others or there might be one much darker and one much lighter, it
depends on the scene/film, but I've always gotten good histograms when
viewing the images in PS6 as long as I've been careful to make sure the
histograms looked good in VueScan (although the two are often slightly
different). I've never found color negative film to be out of bounds of
what the scanner can handle and I've been surprised at the detail it
cold pull out of the thinnest parts of the film. I've also never had to
dump my .ini file.

Although I've agreed with Don in this instance, I don't subscribe to
his overall negative evaluation of VueScan and continue to use it
rather than the miserable software that came with the scanner - I LIKE
having all that control over what the scanner is doing! And I'm willing
to spend the time to learn how to use it.

 

[Alan Smithee]

The problem is in the "shadow" area of the negative -- the clear area of the
negative. The dark area of the negative is where scanners tend to have
problems because they are more dense. The problem I'm seeing I think is
being caused by incorrect calibration I think. I'm going to test my
hypothesis on a raw file and see if it has the same problem.

 

[Don]

Although I've agreed with Don in this instance, I don't subscribe to
his overall negative evaluation of VueScan and continue to use it
rather than the miserable software that came with the scanner

My statements regarding VueScan are often (intentionally?)
misunderstood by a very tiny group of VueScan users.

However, when examined objectively for their factual content (as you
have done) then reasonable people come to a different conclusion.
Indeed, these comments often address exactly the issues they
themselves want solved and shooting the messenger won't solve them.

- I LIKE
having all that control over what the scanner is doing! And I'm willing
to spend the time to learn how to use it.

I like the control too, but the problem with VueScan is that it only
gives the (initial) impression of control by sheer volume. However,
when these settings just plain don't work (many don't) or are
conditionally tied in "mysterious" ways to other settings, there is
very little real control left. Instead, it all becomes a house of
cards and is the very cause of many VueScan bugs.

One need go no further than the author himself. He rarely addressed
the intricacies because when he tried he was often corrected by other
users (e.g. the "raw" scan blunder). That' why he limited his advice
to "delete INI and start again" and "disable everything and set the
gray point".

Now, when even the author loses track of their own development, that's
not flexibility, that's a mess!

Don.

 

[Paul Simons]

On 15 Feb 2005 09:43:57 -0800, (e-mail address removed) wrote:
...
Don.

Fortunately you're commenting on some invented truth inside your head, far
from reality...

Paul

 

[Alan Smithee]

Are you using a really clear area to set your mask value? Are you
scanning with 0,0 black and white points (as a starting point)? This
should ensure that you can adjust each channel in PS with levels.

When I look at my Vue RAW histogram in PS7 I have all sorts of leg room in
the red channel similar to what I see in the EpsonScan. By deleting my INI
file my clipping problem improved but has not been solved. I'm still
wondering where my error is.

 

[gazza95]

Hi Alan

I use the Advanced workflow all of the time now as it simply gives me
enough control to get a decent scan.

Firstly I would check if you have actually got a reasonable base colour
setting, this does change as you change film types. When you have set
this go to the preview histograms and on the upper graph check you can
see the left hand edge of all three colour curves. If not tweek the
base colour settings until you can.

Now I tend to lock the Image colour" and set the individual colours on
the upper histogram so that the ends of each colour curve on the lower
histogram match and do not go beyond the graph axis ends. By doing this
I can ensure that I have lost no data from the scan before loading into
Photoshop. I have always found that the output histogram is a little
different to Photoshop but not enough to worry about.

This then tends to give me a reasonable scan that can be colour
corrected in Photoshop if needed.

Hoewever I have been using some Kodak film and it has caused me some
problems which I think I have now solved. The problem lies in that none
of the film types really matching my film ( and possibly scanner
charachteristics ). If I use the Kodak film types the image was low
contrast with a green cast. Setting Generic film type solved the colour
cast but gave too much contrast. My solution was to use the kodak
setting and play with the brightness's to get the three output colour
curves to roughly match ( my image had a lot of blacks, greys and a
little white) and have a contrast I liked. Having done this I used
these basic settings for the rest of teh films without too much
trouble.



hope this is of some help

gary

Problem: I do my "Advanced Workflow" to eliminate base + fog and orange mask
in Vuescan. (colour neg)
My RGB exposure comes out at approximately1.617. No color compensation. When
I compare the same negative scanned with EpsonScan I have way more leg room
on the dark end of the histogram. Is the Advanced Workflow too

optimistic?

 

[NormBates]

I like the control too, but the problem with VueScan is that it only
gives the (initial) impression of control by sheer volume. However,
when these settings just plain don't work (many don't) or are
conditionally tied in "mysterious" ways to other settings, there is
very little real control left. Instead, it all becomes a house of
cards and is the very cause of many VueScan bugs.

Sheer volume of control is a blessing IF there is good documentation on
what each is doing and how to use them. Otherwise, an user has to learn
on his own and may never figure it out as you pointed out.

Vuescan's sheer volume of control may be because it is a single sw
trying to support numerous scanners. Its continuous upgrade and bug
fixes may also be due to the same reason. Not all controls in the UI are
applicable for every scanner. If not implemented correctly, one
non-applicable control can affect some other controls in an unintended
manner.

 

[Don]

Sheer volume of control is a blessing IF there is good documentation on
what each is doing and how to use them. Otherwise, an user has to learn
on his own and may never figure it out as you pointed out.

Especially when their interaction is flaky and may change with new
every version which, in case of VueScan, come out fast and furious.

But, I agree with you absolutely in principle that having full control
is essential.

BTW, some newer VueScan users may not know that the author has
actually been very much against adding certain controls users want.
Initially, I'm told, VueScan did not even have the Preview window (!?)
because, according to the author, "you don't need that".

I myself participated in a long thread trying to prove to the author
that individual RGB control for Nikon scanners was absolutely
essential (as available in NikonScan). He was very much set against
adding it because, you guessed it, "you don't need that".

However, faced with examples I posted he grudgingly and very
reluctantly added it, but was quite cranky and bad tempered about it.
The episode was very symptomatic of his whole attitude.

Vuescan's sheer volume of control may be because it is a single sw
trying to support numerous scanners. Its continuous upgrade and bug
fixes may also be due to the same reason. Not all controls in the UI are
applicable for every scanner. If not implemented correctly, one
non-applicable control can affect some other controls in an unintended
manner.

Which is what I've been saying all along. And, in case of VueScan,
it's self-inflicted.

Such complexity is nothing new. Programs have always had to present
the user interface based on available capabilities. But once they do,
they then stick with it.

The problem with VueScan is the clumsy and amateurish implementation.
There's absolutely no need to *remove* individual controls
*temporarily* just because they may not be applicable. Even when they
are not used it's essential to see them. The proper solution is to
just disable them.

Constantly reshuffling the UI (after the scanner has been identified)
shows a total ignorance of usability studies and interface design
(muscle memory!). The same goes for redrawing the screen after each
keystroke. Turning this off is not an option because that eliminates
feedback completely.

Which all leads to only one conclusion: VueScan so-called "UI" is a
mess!

Don.

 

[Erik Krause]

When I look at my Vue RAW histogram in PS7 I have all sorts of leg room in
the red channel similar to what I see in the EpsonScan. By deleting my INI
file my clipping problem improved but has not been solved. I'm still
wondering where my error is.

Read and use advanced workflow. Then look at the RGB film base color
values in color tab. Increase all of them proportionally in order to
have the lowest at 1.0 (This is: devide 1.0 by the lowest one and
multiply any channel value with the result).

This way you will avoid any clipping due to too low film base color
values. Use color balance None or set both blac and white point % to
0.0 to avoid further clipping. You most probably get very dull results
this way. Best save them as 48 bit TIFF for further processing in
photoshop.

 

[Alan Smithee]

Thank you Erik. I will try these suggestions tonight. Off the top of my head
I seem to remember the RGB values are in the .800 - .900 range.

 

[Andreas]

Erik, thanks too for the suggestion! I have always had problems with
Vuescan scanning slides with the advanced workflow (negatives work fine
though). I always had clipping on the left side (and at the end I
thought it was characteristic for slides). Now this suggestion seems to
solve it all. Thanks!

Andreas.