Correcting For color film "Orange" cast?

[Bill Kumpf]

I have DSLR copied some color negatives. Post processing is with PaintShop Pro X9. How do you correct for the “orange” mask of color film?

I am digitizing on some 50+ year old family photo history. Some are only negatives, some are only prints. The coping method works fine for both color and B&W prints and B&W negatives. It is a fun project.

Thanks

[Pere Casals]

I have DSLR copied some color negatives. Post processing is with PaintShop Pro X9. How do you correct for the “orange” mask of color film?

I am digitizing on some 50+ year old family photo history. Some are only negatives, some are only prints. The coping method works fine for both color and B&W prints and B&W negatives. It is a fun project.

Thanks


This is with Photoshop: https://www.iamthejeff.com/post/32/the-best-way-to-color-correct-c-41-negative-film-scans

With PaintShop it should be nearly the same, sure all features used have a very close match with PaintShop.

Just learn the PaintShop automation features to save time, it will be worth.

Regards.

[Ted Baker]

That guide on it's own will result in very average results. I put a post earlier on looking for samples, for some software I am writing. If you have access to dropbox, as a one off I would be happy to invert half a dozen scans, as long as the film stock is identifiable.

[Bill Kumpf]

Thanks for the offer. I do need to do this in-house. The film is Kodak Instamatic film from the early '60's. Nothing great, just my kids at there grandparents. If you want the images, I will check and see if I see have access he the MTSU drop box.

[Kinografx]

Hi- if you’re still looking, the best solution I’ve found for dslr scans is to shoot with the dslr white balance set to your source light (in my case, 3000k tungsten), save all the neg scans to their own folder, then use vuescan scanning software (it has a way to point the software to your folder, rather than an actual scanner) and “scan” the negs using whatever settings look best. It’s a bit of trial-error set up, but once dialed in it converts color negs better than any other method I’ve tried.

[Bill Kumpf]

Thanks. I will try the Vuescan software trick.

[SergeyT]

The link above describes probably the most straight forward and rewarding method of converting that is available on the web.
Benefits:
* Capture method agnostic(scanner, digicam and their settings)
* Shows the basic principles of removing of the orange mask
* Reliably sets the dark point (for as long as non-exposed portion of film is part of the source image file)
* Makes non-destructive changes

From there on the rest would be to:
* Fine tune the White point (using the existing curves created by the action or by placing a new one)
* Fine tune the White balance (using the existing curves created by the action or by placing a new one)
* Fine tune the tone curve by adding one or more extra curves
All 3 are a matter of personal taste and image aesthetics

There is no 1 button solution for converting color negs from positive scans , short of specialized equipment.
I find the talks about white balance adjustments for either capture light source or in digicam\scan as not quite relevant. Reason: The negative orange mask varies from type to type ( Portra vs Ektar vs 400H, etc) and it would be next to impossible to determine the optimal color of the light source temp for each. Color balance in a digicam(or scanner) in nothing but a bits manipulation that is similar to what is done during the actual conversion process, so why to do it 2 times?
What might really save time is to capture with the same settings (in case of a digicam scan is to shoot at fixed camera settings; in case of a scanner - same scan settings) and then figuring out the best conversion settings for each butch (roll) on one image from that butch and applying those settings to the rest of images.

[Ted Baker]

The link above describes probably the most straight forward and rewarding method of converting that is available on the web.


The problem with the link above is that it is fundamentally flawed. In short it works sort of, because before the image has been inverted it has been gamma encoded to some colorspace where 18% gray is represented as close to 50%. So then 100% - 50% give 50%, so the middle tones are roughly in the right place... Unfortunately everything else is either a little or lot out... Sure you with practise you can put everything back where you want it, theoretically, but IT IS FAR removed, from what would the result would be if the inversion is done properly, or done the old fashioned way with a print film/paper.

My limited testing using vuescan and a dslr is that it works correctly (or at least the way it supposed too), in that it correctly adjusts as necessary for the input file.

There are a few one buttons solutions and hopefully a new one will available shortly...;)

[pntx]

i've found the photoshop plugin colorperfect (colorneg) works very well.

its $67 to buy it, but has a free trial mode if you wanna see how it works for you.

http://www.colorperfect.com/colorneg.html?lang=en
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MboXvbNOi70

[SergeyT]

"print film/paper" don't exist inside a computer. Bits don't care about 18% gray neither ;)
The linked approach is simple and always works regardless of image acquisition method , film type, encoded gamma.
For images with pure white it is almost flawless. For images with no white it requires white point fine tuning.
It is free and "open" for anyone to see what is under the hood and to make adjustments if/as needed.

[Ted Baker]

It is free and "open" for anyone to see what is under the hood and to make adjustments if/as needed.

Precisely, which is why people can analyse how it works, and how it differs from other approaches, namely the way it was designed to work. As long as you don't clip and have enough precision, you should be able to get to the same point, there are many paths to the same point. If you are happy that's great, I just gave an example of how it differs mathematically from a traditional analogue or indeed hybrid process.

Physics "cares" about Bits and computers.:)