Different result between scanning in Epson's “color negative film” mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?What are the differences between Epson v330/300 and Epson v500 scanners?What is a reasonable file format for film scanning?Batch processing/retouching scanned film with severe artifactsIs there any good method to invert a negative image (duplicated with a digital camera) in Lightroom?Process Silverfast color raw scans in LightroomHow to invert color negative “scan” via DSLR without clipping the red channel?Scanner for uncut medium format film?Best practices for scanning chromogenic black-and-white film?Remove orange filter from scanned negativeScanning negative 35mm: color accuracy, color balance, film bias

How does buying out courses with grant money work?

How do scammers retract money, while you can’t?

Opposite of a diet

What is the opposite of 'gravitas'?

Lay out the Carpet

How does it work when somebody invests in my business?

How did Arya survive the stabbing?

What is the best translation for "slot" in the context of multiplayer video games?

Proof of work - lottery approach

Are student evaluations of teaching assistants read by others in the faculty?

Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!

Is this apparent Class Action settlement a spam message?

Large drywall patch supports

A particular customize with green line and letters for subfloat

Is `x >> pure y` equivalent to `liftM (const y) x`

Gears on left are inverse to gears on right?

Risk of infection at the gym?

CREATE opcode: what does it really do?

Purchasing a ticket for someone else in another country?

Detecting if an element is found inside a container

Why escape if the_content isnt?

India just shot down a satellite from the ground. At what altitude range is the resulting debris field?

How easy is it to start Magic from scratch?

What does the word "Atten" mean?



Different result between scanning in Epson's “color negative film” mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?


What are the differences between Epson v330/300 and Epson v500 scanners?What is a reasonable file format for film scanning?Batch processing/retouching scanned film with severe artifactsIs there any good method to invert a negative image (duplicated with a digital camera) in Lightroom?Process Silverfast color raw scans in LightroomHow to invert color negative “scan” via DSLR without clipping the red channel?Scanner for uncut medium format film?Best practices for scanning chromogenic black-and-white film?Remove orange filter from scanned negativeScanning negative 35mm: color accuracy, color balance, film bias













2















When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










share|improve this question







New contributor




reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    2















    When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      2












      2








      2








      When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      When scanning a 35mm film, if I let Epson's software doing its thing by choosing the "color negative film" mode, without any other adjustment, the resulting raw scan will be yellowish. However, if I do the other method by scanning in positive(orange) film and then invert the curve in the post in photoshop, the resulting scan will be tealish. Why is the difference?







      scanning negative-film scanner epson






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 3 hours ago









      reddyreddy

      132




      132




      New contributor




      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      reddy is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



          Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



          This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



          Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



          Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. It will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



          Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
          Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



          Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



          In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



          White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



          Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

            – reddy
            2 hours ago










          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "61"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106213%2fdifferent-result-between-scanning-in-epsons-color-negative-film-mode-and-scan%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



          Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



          This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



          Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



          Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. It will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



          Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
          Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



          Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



          In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



          White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



          Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

            – reddy
            2 hours ago















          4














          Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



          Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



          This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



          Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



          Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. It will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



          Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
          Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



          Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



          In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



          White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



          Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

            – reddy
            2 hours ago













          4












          4








          4







          Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



          Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



          This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



          Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



          Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. It will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



          Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
          Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



          Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



          In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



          White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



          Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.






          share|improve this answer















          Scanning handles removing the overall orange mask in color negative film.



          Scanning as positive, and then postprocessing invert does not remove it, inversion simply turns that orange mask to a deep blue overall. NOT Bluish, but very strongly deep blue. Then additional work to try to remove it.



          This is a difficult job to do in digital postprocessing (not meaning the process but the result), because such extreme color shifts (to remove the strong blue) strongly risks clipping in digital. Clipping can somewhat change the colors and can lose detail.



          Whereas the scanner can do this as analog (no digital clipping) by simply varying the scan time duration for each of the RGB colors (result acting like a corrective filter in the light). Scanning color negatives is a bit slower than positive slides, but it is a very good thing.



          Not saying it is "impossible" in digital, you might achieve an acceptable result, but it is just really not the same. If you have the scanner, I strongly suggest using it. It is designed for the exact purpose.



          The result of a yellowish cast is not inherent at all. It will be tremendously easier to manage than the deep blue otherwise. :) There are various factors however.



          Not every brand of color negative film has the same exact color of orange mask, so some scanners offered a menu of film choices.
          Or the scanner calibration might not be exact.



          Or more commonly likely, the film might just have been shot with an incorrect color white balance (we had very little choice with film, but there was a base choice of film type or flash bulb type or lighting or filters). Often the shot needed better white balance correction itself. So try scanning other different film negatives in their different lighting situations to see how constant the yellowish cast is? Sunshine outdoors is likely more accurate than indoors.



          In digital work, it would have been better if the digital camera white balance had been correct, but usually, it might be fairly mild and easily corrected in postprocessing.



          White balance was the same problem for film as digital is today, however the lab printing the picture from film did a good job back then correcting it for us. But it is NOT yet corrected in the negative itself.



          Remember the blue flashbulbs? Remember that we still got a good result whether we used them or not? The printing lab fixed it for us. But in digital, or in film scans, that is now our job to correct.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 2 hours ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          WayneFWayneF

          10.1k1924




          10.1k1924












          • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

            – reddy
            2 hours ago

















          • Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

            – reddy
            2 hours ago
















          Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

          – reddy
          2 hours ago





          Thanks for the clearing up my confusion, I will be scanning in "color negative film" mode from now on. I did notice that the different cast from different type of film after the orange mask removal. My Kodak gold 100-5 is slight yellowish, while Kodak gold 100-6 and GC 400-8 are slight tealish. Anyhow they're all very easy to correct as you said it.

          – reddy
          2 hours ago










          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          reddy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Photography Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106213%2fdifferent-result-between-scanning-in-epsons-color-negative-film-mode-and-scan%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Möglingen Índice Localización Historia Demografía Referencias Enlaces externos Menú de navegación48°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.129166666666748°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.1291666666667Sitio web oficial Mapa de Möglingen«Gemeinden in Deutschland nach Fläche, Bevölkerung und Postleitzahl am 30.09.2016»Möglingen

          Virtualbox - Configuration error: Querying “UUID” failed (VERR_CFGM_VALUE_NOT_FOUND)“VERR_SUPLIB_WORLD_WRITABLE” error when trying to installing OS in virtualboxVirtual Box Kernel errorFailed to open a seesion for the virtual machineFailed to open a session for the virtual machineUbuntu 14.04 LTS Virtualbox errorcan't use VM VirtualBoxusing virtualboxI can't run Linux-64 Bit on VirtualBoxUnable to insert the virtual optical disk (VBoxguestaddition) in virtual machine for ubuntu server in win 10VirtuaBox in Ubuntu 18.04 Issues with Win10.ISO Installation

          Torre de la Isleta Índice Véase también Referencias Bibliografía Enlaces externos Menú de navegación38°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.3838888938°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.38388889Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta o Torre Saleta. Base de datos de bienes inmuebles. Patrimonio Cultural. Secretaría de Estado de CulturaFicha BIC Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta. Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural. Generalitat ValencianaLugares de interés. Ayuntamiento del CampelloTorre de la Isleta en CastillosNet.org