On 25 Feb 2011, at 00:03, Rishi Sanyal wrote:
On Feb 24, 2011, at 7:57 AM, Idea Digital Imaging <qcore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:I meant that, seeing as neg/print is a two-stage process, the result of whatever you are doing to get the image into a working space for retouching *should* take into account the nature of the paper that the neg would have been printed on.
I don't understand this either. The job of the input profile is to map your capture (scan or digital) to standard CIEXYZ or CIELAB values. You can then use this info to get your image into a standard device independent color space. Now your image file is ready for editing & subsequent output to any output device. Accuracy on the output end will now depend on an accurate profile that maps CIEXYz or CIELAB values to appropriate RGB values (or whatever space) for the output device. And of course at this point it's desirable to have an output device with a wide enough gamut to reasonably print most of the colors in your scanned + edited image.
The photographer who asks us to drum scan colour negatives wants an image that:
a. resembles the image they would get if they printed the negative on photographic paper, or
b. resembles the original scene. They clearly do NOT want a reproduction of the negative.As I said, I'd like to see examples of profiled negative workflows, so that I can see for myself what a negative is *really* supposed to look like before we start editing it -- especially in cases where there is nothing in the image that we can rely on to be black, white or a neutral grey.
-- Martin Orpen Idea Digital Imaging Ltd