Automatic image optimisation problems
PostPosted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:47 am
Hello,
I find that results I'm getting when I use an Automatic Image Optimization function are seriously substandard.
This is not to say that I have a problem using Silverfast - I had it for about a year now and I have no issues achieving the colour I want by using manual controls. However, recently I had to use Scangear software bundled with my scanner (Canon 9950F has automatic dust removal feature, kinda like ICE) and I was startled to discover that 90% of the time its Autotone feature produced scans which were very good. This got me wanting to sort out whatever SF issues I'm having.
Problems I'm having with Silverfast's automatic adjustments are three-fold:
1. inability to remove even simple colors casts, particularily in negatives
2. malfunctioning tonal range optimization, both in negs and transparencies
3. unpredictable behavior from ACR (automatic color restoration?) - both in negs and trannies.
regarding p.1 - its possible that part of the problem lies with the fact that I often do not have appropriate negafix profiles for the film I scan. I also find that "Auto tolerance" slider never manages to get rid of the cast but starts to damage highlights when I move it past the middle of its range. My attempts to create custom negafix profiles were somewhat successful, but only for the same kind of images - i.e. portraits, besides it takes me far too long to optimize one.
regarding p.2 - oftentimes, even when uncorrected preview looks good in terms of tonal values, using Auto function damages the image severely - shadows get too open, unnatural compression in midtones, overly conservative highlights, etc.
regarding p.3 - by default my images scan very desaturated. Using ACR brings the color back, but in very "uneven" manner - ie. reds might still be not saturated enough, while greens are turning completely garish.
I do not seem to have any color-management related issues, - my previews match the final scans, and I have checked my settings against many help resorces on your site and forum as well as elsewhere on the net.
Conclusion:
If I were to venture a guess as to the nature of my problems, I'd say it seems that SilverFast's Auto-Image Optimization routine bases its decisions on a faulty preview data.
I'm submitting three scans of the same image, first one scanned with Scangear(Autotone), second one with Silverfast (Auto), third one adjusted by hand; as well as a screen shot of an "Auto" panel from my "Options" screen. These were left untouched from the time I installed SF.
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sg.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sf.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sfadj.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/automenu.jpg
Your help with this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
dimitri
I find that results I'm getting when I use an Automatic Image Optimization function are seriously substandard.
This is not to say that I have a problem using Silverfast - I had it for about a year now and I have no issues achieving the colour I want by using manual controls. However, recently I had to use Scangear software bundled with my scanner (Canon 9950F has automatic dust removal feature, kinda like ICE) and I was startled to discover that 90% of the time its Autotone feature produced scans which were very good. This got me wanting to sort out whatever SF issues I'm having.
Problems I'm having with Silverfast's automatic adjustments are three-fold:
1. inability to remove even simple colors casts, particularily in negatives
2. malfunctioning tonal range optimization, both in negs and transparencies
3. unpredictable behavior from ACR (automatic color restoration?) - both in negs and trannies.
regarding p.1 - its possible that part of the problem lies with the fact that I often do not have appropriate negafix profiles for the film I scan. I also find that "Auto tolerance" slider never manages to get rid of the cast but starts to damage highlights when I move it past the middle of its range. My attempts to create custom negafix profiles were somewhat successful, but only for the same kind of images - i.e. portraits, besides it takes me far too long to optimize one.
regarding p.2 - oftentimes, even when uncorrected preview looks good in terms of tonal values, using Auto function damages the image severely - shadows get too open, unnatural compression in midtones, overly conservative highlights, etc.
regarding p.3 - by default my images scan very desaturated. Using ACR brings the color back, but in very "uneven" manner - ie. reds might still be not saturated enough, while greens are turning completely garish.
I do not seem to have any color-management related issues, - my previews match the final scans, and I have checked my settings against many help resorces on your site and forum as well as elsewhere on the net.
Conclusion:
If I were to venture a guess as to the nature of my problems, I'd say it seems that SilverFast's Auto-Image Optimization routine bases its decisions on a faulty preview data.
I'm submitting three scans of the same image, first one scanned with Scangear(Autotone), second one with Silverfast (Auto), third one adjusted by hand; as well as a screen shot of an "Auto" panel from my "Options" screen. These were left untouched from the time I installed SF.
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sg.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sf.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/sfadj.jpg
www.imagefoundry.tzo.com/automenu.jpg
Your help with this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
dimitri