Color differences in Nikon Scan
in [Scanners]
|
From: Alan Wrigley on 21 Dec 2009 10:48 pip22 <pip22.43juhf(a)no.email.invalid> wrote: > It's the final scan where color quality is important since that's the > image your going to edit and eventually print, not the preview. If a preview just did a raw scan then you would have a point. But since it provides colour controls then it's reasonable to expect the preview to be exactly what it says on the tin. I don't want to wait several minutes to find out the the scan I've just done looks nothing like the preview image that I carefully set up before scanning. Alan
From: Noons on 21 Dec 2009 14:49
Alan Wrigley wrote,on my timestamp of 22/12/2009 2:48 AM: > pip22 <pip22.43juhf(a)no.email.invalid> wrote: > >> It's the final scan where color quality is important since that's the >> image your going to edit and eventually print, not the preview. > > If a preview just did a raw scan then you would have a point. But since it > provides colour controls then it's reasonable to expect the preview to be > exactly what it says on the tin. I don't want to wait several minutes to find > out the the scan I've just done looks nothing like the preview image that I > carefully set up before scanning. As well, I find it useful with Nikonscan to do most colour corrections at scan time. This I do by balancing the colour amplifiers first and then applying curves as necessary. Mostly because I don't have a 16-bit photo editor and Nikonscan works in 16-bit where these things are a lot safer to do. I only use Gimp in the final stages for minor final corrections and cropping/cleanup, whenever that is the case. This is where a reliable preview at scan time becomes very important. |