Howtek D4000 and colormanagement

[Bert Vliegen]

Lenny,
Thanks for sharing. I would only use a ICC profile for chrome's like Velvia50. Don't you use an profile for chrome's and just use the CMS option?
To the others who responded in this topic; I do use Ezcolor but is there an better option or is Ezcolor well enough?
I scan my Wolf Faust for Velvia 50 using the Generic option in DPL, is that correct? And another thing, who has experiance with a HCT and is it worth the $$ comparing to WF? HCT is about 7 times more expensive but do you get a 100% better result? I do understand that this is a rather subjective question but I'm always triple checking before I buy something to enhance the workflow and final result:-)
Many thanks for your help!

[bob carnie]

I agree with Lenny here.

Though I use different scanners than Lenny and did not want to comment on the ones you are discussing, I take the same approach as Lenny and within the programs of each scanner I use, I custom correct each negative, type that I get , save the settings and each time I get the same type of film type will call up that setting. Basically profiling each film type and referring back to those settings as a starting balance.

I thing this is a very practical approach, as I think Lenny and I both see film from various sources( good and bad ).

Also just because you may have a X film type , the master profile for that X film type you have set up may not be a great balance right off the start because of the quality control issues of each lab that may have processed the film. There can be huge variations.. I am talking C41 right now.
But it is always nice to have a lot of variations, and I do keep track of different labs C41 starting balances here in Toronto and always ask where the film was developed

If you are only scanning your own processed film then this procedure is much easier.

Bert,

It's a fine way to go. However, I prefer the Custom CMS option you have in the Pro version. I balance each negative, color or b&w using Histogram and Curves. Then I create a CMS based on those settings, which amounts to a custom profile for that image. An IT8 profile is not required, altho' you will find people that would disagree. This is the advice I got from Phil Lippincott, who designed it all, and its worked well for me.

Lenny

[Bert Vliegen]

Bob thanks and I will certainly use Lenny's and your approach to scanning negatives.

[Tyler Boley]

the only scanning relevant to a color managed workflow, using an ICC profile (not anything else called a "profile"), is for color transparencies. This is the only context within which use of an IT8 is relevant, which is what the OP is asking about. Furthermore, within that workflow, what it excels at is representation of the film as accurately as possible, not as USEFULLY as possible, necessarily. You're on your own from there, but for many of us, it's the best possible starting point for color transparency work.
For negs of any kind, none of this is relevant.
Bert, I use an HCT target, and it works just fine. Since my previous IT8s were old, any difference in quality is difficult to attribute to any inherent superiority of HCTs. There's no end to this though, after that step up, you find out the pundits will now tell you you need more, one for every kind of film you scan... Kodachrome, Fuji, Ekta... I don't scan enough chromes in a year to justify that.
I don't know EZcolor so shouldn't comment on the software comparisons. In this economy the options have shrunk dramatically. I1Publish, finally when introduced, didn't even offer scanner profiling, and to date may or may not have finally supported HCT targets.
My experience is that the various profiling options I tried did not yield dramatically different scanner profile results, Agfa, Xrite, Monaco, Silverfast. Also, evaluation of them is tricky. I'd use what you have and see if consistent weaknesses arise before going down that road. There was a thread beginning on the LL forum about comparing scanner profiling differences, I think it petered out. If Pat from Chromix sees this thread, he may have comments about what options currently exist.

[Bert Vliegen]

Tyler, thanks and it helps me to understand the subject which I want to master

[Lenny Eiger]

Lenny,
Thanks for sharing. I would only use a ICC profile for chrome's like Velvia50. Don't you use an profile for chrome's and just use the CMS option?!

OK, let me clarify. Aztek spent years working and reworking their chrome CMS profile, the one they supply stock with the program. I generally use that, because its so good that the adjustments I make after the fact are minimal - a point or two here and there. Of course, I calibrate my monitors, but I don't need an IT8 input profile. The color is spot on.

When it comes to color neg and b&w neg, I pre-scan in Raw Uncorrected, then correct it manually, primarily with curves. Once my corrections are complete, I make a custom CMS. This gets loaded into the scanner before the scan and modifies the way it scans, so that my corrections are taken into account, and the scan returned has a full, uncombed, histogram.

The only exception to the standard chrome treatment comes when the chrome is dark, underexposed. Then I switch to Log Tranny which pulls everything possible out, on a Logarithmic scale. However, it has to be balanced like a color neg, as in manually.

Does that clear it up?

Lenny

[Bert Vliegen]

Hi Lenny,
yes it certainly does and I will make some comparisons with the cms option of Velvia 50 and my IT8 version. Thanks, Bert!