Color Space Choices for Nikon 5000 Scans

[andrewrodney]

Originally Posted by kav

I hadn't thought of that, but you could be right. Could also be something like input profile --> LAB ---> Adobe/prophoto/etc.

Regarding custom input profiles, don't they ship IT8 targets with that model?

You don’t even need to trip to Lab...

Its not a matter of a target (and there are better than IT8), its if the software can use it and give you the data it describes. Not all scanners can be profiled based on the software driving them. All scanners can be profiled (for transparency film) if the software driving hands of the data the right way.

[kav]

Originally Posted by andrewrodney

You don’t even need to trip to Lab...

Its not a matter of a target (and there are better than IT8), its if the software can use it and give you the data it describes. Not all scanners can be profiled based on the software driving them. All scanners can be profiled (for transparency film) if the software driving hands of the data the right way.

I can recall software going through lab but I can't remember which. It's not like I was suggesting that as a good thing. IT8 was shipped with a lot of consumer model scanners. I never said it was good. It's just something they bundled probably because it was cheap to do so. Has it been mentioned anywhere if he's scanning transparency or negative film? Profiling negative film would be irritating.

[acetone]

I've been following this thread for awhile since I have similar questions as stlsailor. I have a few things to add.

Originally Posted by stlsailor

Question 1: Am I correct in thinking that (a) AdobeWide is the closest thing to the native color space of the scanner, and (b) that it's probably narrower than ProPhoto RGB?

First, choosing scan settings that contain all of the data the scanner is capable of producing is indeed desirable. As stlsailor has mentioned, it is not apparent which scan setting that is. Just as stlsailor said, images scanned with "Scanner RGB" show an assigned profile of sRGB in PS, Bridge, etc. regardless of the working space. Using Apple's ColorSync, I have compared the gamuts of the color spaces that come with the Nikon SuperCoolscan 5000 (which I am also using) to try and figure out which is actually the widest. However, there are many more choices there than in the scan software, and none of them is called "Scanner RGB" or anything similar. Also, scanning in either "Wide Gamut" or "Wide Gamut compensated" both result in an attached profile of Nikon AdobeWide RGB 4.0.0.3000. (Interesting.) The Nikon AdobeWide RGB does seem to be the widest color space offered with the scan software, the only other thing coming close being CIE RGB. I did make a scan tonight with Nikon CMS turned off, and the Finder shows it as having a color space simply as "RGB". (What does that mean?) In answer to part (b), AdobeWide seems narrower than ProPhoto in the blues but wider in the violets. Overall, ProPhoto is a bit wider, I think.

[acetone]

I made a factual error. I should have written in the third-to-last sentence: "I did make a scan tonight with Nikon CMS turned off, and the Finder does not show that it has an assigned profile (unlike the others), so maybe that's the best option."

[kav]

Originally Posted by acetone

I made a factual error. I should have written in the third-to-last sentence: "I did make a scan tonight with Nikon CMS turned off, and the Finder does not show that it has an assigned profile (unlike the others), so maybe that's the best option."

CMS turned off would be what you'd use if you're building your own profile for the scanner. Have you checked any of nikon's forums to see what users there have been doing? I just know when you're keeping too many copies of the same image, file management becomes extremely cumbersome. If you want the absolute max information possible and editability possible, a completely unadjusted scan simply tagged with an appropriate input profile would probably give you that. If you're scanning transparency film, this will look pretty flat when first brought into photoshop. If you're scanning negative film, it will look extremely flat. Photoshop needs some way to interpret the data though.

[acetone]

Yes, I plan on building my own scanner profile. I ordered calibration targets yesterday for the purpose. However, Nikon Scan does not allow one to assign custom profiles, so it will have to be assigned in PS. I am hoping it will limit my need for tinkering in Adobe Camera Raw.

Originally Posted by kav

If you want the absolute max information possible and editability possible, a completely unadjusted scan simply tagged with an appropriate input profile would probably give you that.

I agree, but what I was trying to say in my previous post is that it is not obvious which setting in NS4 gives the absolute max information possible. I am not making any image adjustments in NS4, only experimenting with the CMS options, and not all options appear equal. Some of them give widely varying results, but I might try to make a scanner profile for each setting, apply them, and see if the results end up looking the same. I'll let you know, hopefully within a couple weeks.