Participant

Open for Voting

P: Ability to invert negative scans to positives (color and black-and-white)

180 replies
9103 views
Translate

I would dearly like to see the Lightroom 4 Beta team implement an additional feature in the final release. That feature would be the ability to take a camera+macro lens image of a B&W negative -- essentially a camera-based scan of a negative -- and invert the negative image to a positive image at the beginning of the development process in such a way that the resulting sliders in the LR4 Develop Module would not operate in reverse. As I understand it, this capability exists in Photoshop, but I don't own Photoshop. I do own Photoshop Elements 9, but that program only supports an 8-bit workflow, not 16-bits per channel, and round-tripping between LR & PSE9 requires the reimportation of a TIFF file that is more than twice the size of my NEF RAW files. Since this programming wizardry already exists in Photoshop, I would think that it would be a relatively simple matter to transfer and adapt that code for LR4 -- but then, I'm not a programmer, so what do I know...

I've been digitizing 40-year-old Kodachrome slides from my Peace Corps days in Africa, using a 55mm Micro-Nikkor (macro) lens, coupled to a Nikon ES-1 Slide Copy Attachment, and even on a D300s body, I can get truly excellent results. I can't wait to continue that work using the pending 36 megapixel Nikon D800 body with an upgraded f/2.8 macro lens (mine is the old 55mm f/3.5 design). I really, REALLY want to be able to camera-scan my many B&W negatives without having to generate huge intermediate TIFF files.

You can respond to this request by emailing me, Jeff Kennedy Thanks, in advance, for taking the time to review and consider my request. I LOVE Lightroom 3, and from what I've seen, I'm going to love LR4 even more. I REALLY appreciate the effort that Adobe takes to solicit input from the photographic user community.

BTW, if the feature I request *can't* be implemented right away, could the LR support team provide detailed, interim instructions as to how to use the "backwards" sliders, and in what sequence? That would be very much appreciated. I'm sure many older LR users have considerable analog image collections that they would like to digitize, and doing so in-camera is both 1) of surprisingly high quality, 2) MUCH faster than using flatbed scanners and 3) of much higher quality and resolution than flatbed scan and MUCH cheaper than professional drum scans.

Show previous replies

D

drtonyb

Legend

John,

Here is an attempt to answer that question. Starting with a colour film negative DSLR 'scanned' to a NEF image, I have applied my invert and colour correction profile, shifted the colour temperature by -800K, dropped the highlights to -100 and pushed the shadows to +100 in Lr. The result is the reference image on the left in the image below. I then reset the develop settings, opened in PS, ran an action that inverts, removes the colour cast and auto sets the tone curve (this is what I used to create my ACR/Lr profile), then saved it as a TIFF (16 bit ProPhoto). Back in Lr, I set the colour balance (using the sampling tool), dropped the highlights to -100 and pushed the shadows to +100 on this TIFF, just as I had with the NEF image. The result is on the right.

Although difficult to see in the small image above, apart from a slight difference in colour balance, the most noticeable differences are in the shadows. In the full size images, the adjusted TIFF has no detail in the shadows. In the NEF image I can see folds in the man's trousers, but in the TIFF, the trousers are just black. Here is a 1:1 zoomed in view of the two images for comparison.

Pushing highlights and shadows to these limits might appear to be extreme, but it does demonstrate the difference between adjustments in RAW and other image formats.

RAW processing in Lr still wins hands down for me.

Translate

johnrellis

Legend

I don't view Todd's comments here as mean-spirited. Rather, I find them a constructive contribution to a detailed discussion about why this feature is being requested. As he invariably does, Todd avoided any ad hominem comments and focused on the objective issues. These sorts of back-and-forth discussions about features and alternative solutions can be the most effective way to get to a truer understanding of users' needs, their workflows, and possible solutions with and without LR.

I have a legacy Nikon 5000 scanner, and while it continues to work like a champ, Im worried about what happens when it breaks, and I've wondered whether I'll get significantly better results using a DSLR instead. I've previously proposed here an alternative LR-only solution for B&W negatives (inverting the tone curve and exporting/re-importing as 16-bit TIFFs). So I'm very interested in how a raw-based workflow might work for me.

Translate

stevel24076854

Participating Frequently

Todd, this is your third time being mean spirited.

Translate

Todd Shaner

Legend

"I'm not sure how your correcting me helps this guy's software problem."
Steve, I was actually trying to help you. I'm glad you now understand the request being made here and why it's needed. As they say "DIfferent strokes for different Folks!" You may want to give it try sometime.

Translate

stevel24076854

Participating Frequently

Todd,

Anthony said: "... my DSLR a macro lens and a slide copying attachment, "
That's not the scan method I use, and it's not a ACR scanner.

Translate

stevel24076854

Participating Frequently

Todd,

He didn't make it clear to me. My software gets positives like a camera image, so I have not problem with positives using my method. I don't use the camera-scan method. And those might be the problem.

I have had the greatest respect for your Champion status Todd, as I have praise your answers. I used to be a Champion but my (Windows) software engineering credentials takes the place of it now, as I left to tend to my company for a long while. This is your 3rd time to correct me. I'm not sure how your correcting me helps this guy's software problem. It was the first time, nothing would be said, as it's very interesting to me.

Steve Lehman, mcse

Translate

D

drtonyb

Legend

Todd,

Couldn't have put it better. That's precisely why we use Lr with RAW images.

Translate

Todd Shaner

Legend

"I don't think Adobe is ignoring you. I think you didn't make yourself clear in the first place. At least I wasn't clear at first, for sure."

Steve it sounds like you're still not clear on why a LR/ACR raw file invert function is being requested. We are well aware color negative raw files created with a camera copier setup can be processed with good results using PS/PSE. However, this requires creating a separate RGB image file (PSD, TIFF) using ACR or LR. The resulting file has the camera profile and other settings permanently applied to the image file, which breaks the non-destructive workflow. This RGB file is significantly larger than the original raw file, which also needs to be saved for possible future editing changes.

What is being requested here is a fully non-destructive workflow for processing color negative raw files using only LR or ACR. Inverting the Tone Curve is not a viable solution since it causes the WB and Tone controls to work backwards and behave in a non-linear manner. What's required is an invert function that is applied to the raw data before any other control processing. The objective being to allow editing color and B&W negative raw image files in the same manner as normal camera images.

Translate

stevel24076854

Participating Frequently

I don't think Adobe is ignoring you. I think you didn't make yourself clear in the first place. At least I wasn't clear at first, for sure.

Comparing your two images, I can see what the real problem is. You should not be saving in PSD. Save it in PDF and you will have a choice of JPEG compression or an uncompressed like TIFF OR the best of both, an adjusted compression in between. PDF in Adobe is flexible and you won't be using Acrobat or Reader.

There's no skin of my nose, if you are quite perturbed with Adobe's software and with Adobe, go ahead and search for something you can live with. No software is perfect as you want it to be.

However, I think you have not looked over all the choices you have in Photoshop. For one thing, you have not told me you run Elements or Photoshop, as you keep mentioning only LR which doesn't invert negatives, and we got that message clear now. But if you used Element with it, and it is cheaper than LR, and like the rest of us professionals use several of Adobe products, you might have what you want.

And if PDF doesn't do the job for ya, try another format. There are lots of uncompressed container formats. I don't suppose you got into those yet? Those will contain your image in an compressed format yet the image placed inside will be uncompressed while the container format is compressed. It does save space while you retain the full image too. Nifty huh? We use those mostly for videos but they can be used for any (large) image file, and negatives tend to use lots of space, especially when inverted. Study container formats: test on Friday.

If this doesn't do it for ya, then wallow in your anger longer, and find another photo editor, maybe. You can always save your image in another brand of software in PSD again, and try to open it in LR but don't expect it to be perfect. And I think "perfect" is what you're trying to get, so hard. Sure the shadows show but there might be a remedy if you're patient.

SL

Translate

D

drtonyb

Legend

Steve,

I'm fully aware of what Photoshop and Elements can do regarding inverting a negative image, but I use Lightroom Classic to process my RAW images and I'm certainly not interested in buying a dedicated scanner. For my purpose I have a scanner, my DSLR a macro lens and a slide copying attachment, a combination that does a great job.

Lightroom does not have an invert function and that is what has been asked for here for more than half of Lr's life. Sure, there are workarounds that can invert a negative image, like inverting the tone curve or applying a profile, but all suffer from the same problem - reversed or unuseable tone adjustments. These methods are just trying to overcome Lr's basic deficiency, no proper invert tool. There are certainly no tools to properly deal with colour negative film 'scanned' into a RAW image.

Here is a 1:1 comparison of a RAW 'scanned' film negative processed in Lr and the same image processed in Photoshop. On the left is the image processed in Lr using a profile I created (in Photoshop and Camera Raw) and applying some manual develop adjustments. On the right is the same RAW image after opening from Lr into Photoshop, applying the same profile in Camera Raw, saving the result back to Lr as a PSD, then applying White Balance and Auto Tone adjustments. It might be difficult to see clearly in the small image here, but the quality of the two images is chalk and cheese, especially in the shadows, where the PSD image has blocked up almost everything to black. The PSD image is actually quite awful.

So for me, neither Photoshop nor Elements offer a satisfactory solution. The solution is obvious and I would think, not very difficult. Adobe just chooses to remain deaf and silent on the request, and that's very disappointing.

Translate

Show more replies

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.