I am currently scanning a roll of Ektachrome using Plustek 8100 with both SilverFast and VueScan, and I was going nuts that I was having a hard time reproducing the color on the scan to the ones when I see the film through a white light. Your video just opened my horizon, and I will try to color balance the image as best as I can during the scan phase. Thanks for sharing your expertise!
Yes! I have only a few strong opinions about film that will probably never change and one of them is that you have the right to edit your negative scans as you see fit. I've seen people go as far as not removing dust because that's inauthentic (???). I don't question their judgment unless they try to force it on others.
I totally agree with letting people do their thing but the ‘no edits allowed’ gang can rub off on beginners. I’ve shown people how the colour curves can fix film scans using the snapseed app on my phone before - It hurts when they say ‘oh I didn’t know I was able to do that’ 🥴
@@JonathanNotley lol. Yeah man. Snapseed was my bread and butter for a while for smartphone pics. Now I'm trying to switch to Lightroom but still cheating on Adobe with Google...
ALWAYS depends on the processing. C-41 and E-6 are tough to control if you don't have enough film to run through to keep the chems in control. Even in the heyday of film, this was tough. In most large cities, you were lucky to have ONE good lab. I dealt with the Mid-West and there was 1 Great lab in Cleveland , 1 in Grand Rapids (Corporate Color), 1 in Indianapolis, 1 in Columbus (Photographic Techinques) , 1 in Pittsburgh, 1 in Ann Arbor (Foto1), 1 in Detroit (Color Detroit). None of those exist today. If you shoot E-6 film, send it to AgX Imaging in Sault Ste Marie, Michigan. Mike Lucier still does fantastic work. That's it.
Perhaps those who have major colour cast shifts should shoot a grey card or colour checker? Of course a calibrated monitor is always a good place to start.
Good explanation! CineStill 800T with a warming filter is probably my favourite colour film for daylight these days. It really looks amazingly clean, and the colours are fantastic! I've been using an 85B filter, but I'm gonna try the 81A next time.
@Bobby Brady You're just wrong about that. Before digital cameras, using tungsten films in daylight with a warming filter was very common. And feature film photographers still do that all the time. It is the only way of correcting white balance on film. And the good thing about using tungsten balanced film is that you can use it in all lighting conditions, if you have the right filters. The CineStill 800T (or Kodak Vision 500T) has a very unique look that no other films can replicate. I'm a big fan of that look, so why would I not use it?
@Bobby Brady Ok, I assume you're just trolling now? A warming filter only takes away half a stop of speed. And why would you bother making a new film stock when you could just correct the white balance with a simple, cheap filter? That makes no sense at all. It was and is common to shoot films on the same stock, using ND and warming/cooling filters to correct for white balance. That's just a fact. If you don't believe it, you can look it up. There's also the simple fact that a daylight balanced version of that particular film does not exist. So how would you get that look with a completely different film? Bye.
@Bobby Brady I've been a film photographer for 20 years. Using Warming and cooling filters to correct white balance on film is very basic stuff, and I obviously never claimed that ND filters are used for that. Just google it if you for some bizarre reason don't believe me. CineStill 800T is rated at ISO 800 in tungsten light, 500 in daylight. I wouldn't call that slow, but I guess you know better? And I wouldn't call half a stop "substantial" light loss either. No one would. You do in fact sound like you're new to motion picture film, because, again, this is very basic stuff for motion picture film photographers. Try some education next time before going on a useless rant. Also, why do you think they give you an ISO rating for daylight use if it's so stupid to use it in daylight? You should probably contact CineStill and tell them what assholes they are and that you know far better. Bye forever.
this video answered pretty much all the questions I had about colour negatives scanning! they should award you a nobel prize, mate! :D such a concise explanation and demonstration of colour casts, colour balancing etc.. the only question left unanswered in my opinion is how to preserve individual film stock character.. and if there even is such a thing? colour balancing brings everything in a photo closer to true to life colours, but does it remove the film stock's character? anyways, this is the best video on colour balancing in analogue photography that I've seen on youtube... had to say it again :D cheers!
Thanks for your kind words! An analogy for the specifics film’s characteristics would be as follows: imagine a stool with three legs, the RGB channels are the three legs whilst the film’s characteristics are the shape of the seat on top. You’ll get the film’s characteristics no matter what length the legs are but it will look best when properly balanced. On the other hand you have films that offer up certain casts in a kind of defective but acceptable way. The two that spring to mind are Provia’s blue casts and Superia’s green shadows when under exposed. Some people like the look but I usually fix my Provia and avoid superia
Marko Ramljak another analogy would be looking at an architect’s blueprints from an odd angle. All the lines (colours) still relate spatially to each other, you’re just getting an odd reading of it. In this analogy ‘fixing the colour balance’ is like walking round to the front of the blueprint and looking at it head on.
@@JonathanNotley My pleasure! but seriously, you're the only photographer on youtube (that I know of) with proper explanation of colour balance in colour negatives.. all the other photographers talk about "correct colours" and how this scanner and that software are rubbish because their scans don't display "correct colours".. none of them talk about colour balancing as concisely as you do and have just left me more confused than I was before watching their videos :/ I get the stool and blueprint analogy. But I got into analog photography for several reasons the main two being: I like the look and character of analog photos and I like the colours of analog photography. My understaning was that each and every colour negative has it's own character. I am by no means experienced in analog photography, I just got into it a few months ago so I am still trying to wrap my mind around analog colours and film character. For example, Portra is often praised as THE ultimate film for, well, portraits because of it's rendition of skin tones. But, ignoring film grain and other factors, if I shoot a portrait using Portra 400 and, say, AGFA Vista 400 and colour balance both of them, won't that make them both look pretty much the same? That's my main concern with colour balancing - if by colour balancing my photos I'm removing the character of the negative - the subtle colour nuances that a certain negative has. Anyway, sorry about the "Russian novel" of a post and thanks for clearing so many thing up :D Cheers!
I have to spend more time practicing this. I usually send the negatives to a lsb in order to avoid doing this, but I really think this is very necessary. Great video.
The balanced scanning section doesn't apply to people using labs but the other two sections certainly still play a role! I use a lab for high-resolution or high-volume jobs and sometimes the scans they provide don't even match their previous attempts on the same negative.
@@JonathanNotley thats sad... but I use a super high quality lab. They know what they do. Anyway, meant that it's always good to know this, even when I use a lab. Before I found this lab, I also had some bad experiences with some labs.
My photos look fine when they are further back but when I zoom in on my samsung colors get too bright. I usually have to go and edit the photos darker after.
Well, I use a colorchecker chart and take the first frame with it. The software then corrects for the colors automatically. That's not a new invention. It was used in the movie industry long ago as well. What is new is the digital post processing and correction.
If you’re exclusively talking about new film stocks I find slide film casts the most. I actually have a photoshop action specifically for sorting out provia blues. I guess expired films are another high risk category.
Jonathan Notley I have issues with Portra400 in particular. I develope it on my own and it’s much more difficult to get it right than e.g. Fuji Pro400H
I stopped with color film at all. What is the sense of shooting analog in color and doing all post work in a digital way, spending money and much more time? Color -> digital camera, B&W-> film & darkroom. So far the video is o.k.
Colour balance has been a thing since colour film. Check out the colour channels on an enlarger head. There’s on on screen at 1:03 in the video or you just have to google ‘Colour enlarger’.
As someone who has been calibrating TV's for 25 years I can tell you that the people who "like it the way they like it" are always going to be more adament than you. Don't burn yourself out sweating them but this is an excellent way for a beginner to not go down that path to begin with. I kind of equate it to this whole "natural wine" rage. It's mostly just wine that's no one has finished making. Just like those Cinestill 800t images that look like they have algea all over them except for the searing magenta bits. One point that is far more nuanced and could probably use a whole series is scanning while retaining the natural character of individual film stocks. 400h and Portra can probably be balanced to look far more alike than they naturally are. A large part of the reason to shoot film at all is for those tones and colour "imbalances". Part of some people's issues with modern high end DSLRs is that colours are TOO perfectly balanced. In any case, great video. Keep making content.
Hugely underrated channel. Great video, super insightful!
My favorite channel for scanning info.
your film scanning and editing videos are very good and useful
really enjoy your videos man - they are just the right pace
I am currently scanning a roll of Ektachrome using Plustek 8100 with both SilverFast and VueScan, and I was going nuts that I was having a hard time reproducing the color on the scan to the ones when I see the film through a white light. Your video just opened my horizon, and I will try to color balance the image as best as I can during the scan phase. Thanks for sharing your expertise!
Glad someone else is on the colour balance crusade, haha.
ditto
Brilliant vid :-) Colour balancing and getting those colours printed accurately is a BIG thing for me!
Yes! I have only a few strong opinions about film that will probably never change and one of them is that you have the right to edit your negative scans as you see fit. I've seen people go as far as not removing dust because that's inauthentic (???). I don't question their judgment unless they try to force it on others.
I totally agree with letting people do their thing but the ‘no edits allowed’ gang can rub off on beginners. I’ve shown people how the colour curves can fix film scans using the snapseed app on my phone before - It hurts when they say ‘oh I didn’t know I was able to do that’ 🥴
@@JonathanNotley lol. Yeah man. Snapseed was my bread and butter for a while for smartphone pics. Now I'm trying to switch to Lightroom but still cheating on Adobe with Google...
Thanks a lot. I never thought about colour balance...🙈 Only did white balance and thought it was enough... Thanks again
ALWAYS depends on the processing. C-41 and E-6 are tough to control if you don't have enough film to run through to keep the chems in control.
Even in the heyday of film, this was tough. In most large cities, you were lucky to have ONE good lab.
I dealt with the Mid-West and there was 1 Great lab in Cleveland , 1 in Grand Rapids (Corporate Color), 1 in Indianapolis, 1 in Columbus (Photographic Techinques) , 1 in Pittsburgh, 1 in Ann Arbor (Foto1), 1 in Detroit (Color Detroit).
None of those exist today.
If you shoot E-6 film, send it to AgX Imaging in Sault Ste Marie, Michigan. Mike Lucier still does fantastic work. That's it.
Perhaps those who have major colour cast shifts should shoot a grey card or colour checker?
Of course a calibrated monitor is always a good place to start.
Great, thanks. I digitize my slides / negs with my DSLR in raw mode but the in camera and PS tips were very useful.
Good explanation! CineStill 800T with a warming filter is probably my favourite colour film for daylight these days. It really looks amazingly clean, and the colours are fantastic! I've been using an 85B filter, but I'm gonna try the 81A next time.
@Bobby Brady Because no other colour film looks like that!
@Bobby Brady You're just wrong about that. Before digital cameras, using tungsten films in daylight with a warming filter was very common. And feature film photographers still do that all the time. It is the only way of correcting white balance on film. And the good thing about using tungsten balanced film is that you can use it in all lighting conditions, if you have the right filters.
The CineStill 800T (or Kodak Vision 500T) has a very unique look that no other films can replicate. I'm a big fan of that look, so why would I not use it?
@Bobby Brady Ok, I assume you're just trolling now? A warming filter only takes away half a stop of speed. And why would you bother making a new film stock when you could just correct the white balance with a simple, cheap filter? That makes no sense at all. It was and is common to shoot films on the same stock, using ND and warming/cooling filters to correct for white balance. That's just a fact. If you don't believe it, you can look it up.
There's also the simple fact that a daylight balanced version of that particular film does not exist. So how would you get that look with a completely different film? Bye.
@Bobby Brady I've been a film photographer for 20 years. Using Warming and cooling filters to correct white balance on film is very basic stuff, and I obviously never claimed that ND filters are used for that. Just google it if you for some bizarre reason don't believe me.
CineStill 800T is rated at ISO 800 in tungsten light, 500 in daylight. I wouldn't call that slow, but I guess you know better? And I wouldn't call half a stop "substantial" light loss either. No one would. You do in fact sound like you're new to motion picture film, because, again, this is very basic stuff for motion picture film photographers. Try some education next time before going on a useless rant.
Also, why do you think they give you an ISO rating for daylight use if it's so stupid to use it in daylight? You should probably contact CineStill and tell them what assholes they are and that you know far better.
Bye forever.
Ooo, I need to try this. Very interesting concept
It is normal that realy useful things to be underrated.
Who need them?
Nice video, but a written page is also useful.
Plese keep going.
this video answered pretty much all the questions I had about colour negatives scanning!
they should award you a nobel prize, mate! :D
such a concise explanation and demonstration of colour casts, colour balancing etc..
the only question left unanswered in my opinion is how to preserve individual film stock character.. and if there even is such a thing?
colour balancing brings everything in a photo closer to true to life colours, but does it remove the film stock's character?
anyways, this is the best video on colour balancing in analogue photography that I've seen on youtube... had to say it again :D
cheers!
Thanks for your kind words! An analogy for the specifics film’s characteristics would be as follows: imagine a stool with three legs, the RGB channels are the three legs whilst the film’s characteristics are the shape of the seat on top. You’ll get the film’s characteristics no matter what length the legs are but it will look best when properly balanced.
On the other hand you have films that offer up certain casts in a kind of defective but acceptable way. The two that spring to mind are Provia’s blue casts and Superia’s green shadows when under exposed. Some people like the look but I usually fix my Provia and avoid superia
Marko Ramljak another analogy would be looking at an architect’s blueprints from an odd angle. All the lines (colours) still relate spatially to each other, you’re just getting an odd reading of it. In this analogy ‘fixing the colour balance’ is like walking round to the front of the blueprint and looking at it head on.
@@JonathanNotley My pleasure! but seriously, you're the only photographer on youtube (that I know of) with proper explanation of colour balance in colour negatives.. all the other photographers talk about "correct colours" and how this scanner and that software are rubbish because their scans don't display "correct colours".. none of them talk about colour balancing as concisely as you do and have just left me more confused than I was before watching their videos :/
I get the stool and blueprint analogy. But I got into analog photography for several reasons the main two being: I like the look and character of analog photos and I like the colours of analog photography. My understaning was that each and every colour negative has it's own character. I am by no means experienced in analog photography, I just got into it a few months ago so I am still trying to wrap my mind around analog colours and film character.
For example, Portra is often praised as THE ultimate film for, well, portraits because of it's rendition of skin tones. But, ignoring film grain and other factors, if I shoot a portrait using Portra 400 and, say, AGFA Vista 400 and colour balance both of them, won't that make them both look pretty much the same? That's my main concern with colour balancing - if by colour balancing my photos I'm removing the character of the negative - the subtle colour nuances that a certain negative has.
Anyway, sorry about the "Russian novel" of a post and thanks for clearing so many thing up :D
Cheers!
I have to spend more time practicing this. I usually send the negatives to a lsb in order to avoid doing this, but I really think this is very necessary. Great video.
The balanced scanning section doesn't apply to people using labs but the other two sections certainly still play a role! I use a lab for high-resolution or high-volume jobs and sometimes the scans they provide don't even match their previous attempts on the same negative.
@@JonathanNotley thats sad... but I use a super high quality lab. They know what they do. Anyway, meant that it's always good to know this, even when I use a lab. Before I found this lab, I also had some bad experiences with some labs.
My photos look fine when they are further back but when I zoom in on my samsung colors get too bright. I usually have to go and edit the photos darker after.
Well, I use a colorchecker chart and take the first frame with it. The software then corrects for the colors automatically. That's not a new invention. It was used in the movie industry long ago as well. What is new is the digital post processing and correction.
There’s no need to do that. I really hope you’re shooting half frame and not wasting 1/36th to 1/10th of your film.
@@JonathanNotley As long as the light situation is stable it only needs one reference shot per roll.
ruclips.net/video/IR9iYviBNsc/видео.html
No you simply don’t need reference shots. You don’t need true to life accurate colour, it adds nothing to your output
Is there a filmstock for which you have to more correction than other? I always experience most trouble with the Portras...
If you’re exclusively talking about new film stocks I find slide film casts the most. I actually have a photoshop action specifically for sorting out provia blues. I guess expired films are another high risk category.
I never really shoot tungsten balanced films though
Jonathan Notley I have issues with Portra400 in particular. I develope it on my own and it’s much more difficult to get it right than e.g. Fuji Pro400H
best content ever! thank you
🙏🏾🙏🏾 thanks for this video
“Please stop these people”
I am these people 😭😭
I stopped with color film at all. What is the sense of shooting analog in color and doing all post work in a digital way, spending money and much more time?
Color -> digital camera, B&W-> film & darkroom.
So far the video is o.k.
Colour balance has been a thing since colour film. Check out the colour channels on an enlarger head. There’s on on screen at 1:03 in the video or you just have to google ‘Colour enlarger’.
As someone who has been calibrating TV's for 25 years I can tell you that the people who "like it the way they like it" are always going to be more adament than you. Don't burn yourself out sweating them but this is an excellent way for a beginner to not go down that path to begin with. I kind of equate it to this whole "natural wine" rage. It's mostly just wine that's no one has finished making. Just like those Cinestill 800t images that look like they have algea all over them except for the searing magenta bits.
One point that is far more nuanced and could probably use a whole series is scanning while retaining the natural character of individual film stocks. 400h and Portra can probably be balanced to look far more alike than they naturally are. A large part of the reason to shoot film at all is for those tones and colour "imbalances". Part of some people's issues with modern high end DSLRs is that colours are TOO perfectly balanced.
In any case, great video. Keep making content.
💕
Found this in "the darkroom"
It was me who posted it there!
I know lol pretty surprised to see it
“Please stop these people.” Lol