scanning problem? or what?

[Doh]

I have a problem somewhere, but I'm not sure where.

When I scan in pictures with people (it's where I see the problem the most), the preview my scanner gives me shows that the image looks reasonably close to the photograph. But when I actually capture the image into PS (with no fiddling with scanner settings), the image has too much red in it. I see this most obviously with the skintone of the people in the image. The scanner, as far as I can tell, doesn't colour manage so the image has no profile when it's brought into PS.

The workspace I use in PS is Adobe RGB (1998). (I've also tried BruceRGB but it's pretty much the same as AdobeRGB.) If I change the working space profile to my monitor, it looks fine - but you're not supposed to use that as a work space. My scanner is an HP 6300c scanjet and I use the HP Precision Pro 2.0 software. I've calibrated my monitor using Adobe Gamma.

So, I'm not sure if it's my monitor, scanner or working space. The photos where taken by me, so maybe it could have been the wrong kind of film for the wrong kind of light?



Any ideas or advice would be appreciated!

Doh.

[Doug Nelson]

Can we see a sample?

Which version of PS are you using? (big differences from 5 to 5.5 to 6)

How does it print?

What do you mean "change the working space to your monitor"?

[Doh]

Ok, here's a shot where there is a red colour cast. I've attached a file since I don't have a web site for images right now. I've had to reduce resolution and size a lot to be able to include it as an attachment, but you can still see the colour cast. It's not much, but it's enough to throw the balance off. You can especially tell by the skin tone of the people in the photo. (I hope the file isn't too big).

What I meant by that comment is that if I choose the profile that Adobe Gamma creates as my working space, then the image looks more balanced. If I choose AdobeRGB or BruceRDB, I get the red colour cast. But any docs I've read on colour management say that you shouldn't use the profile created by Adobe Gamma as your working space.

I'm using PS 6. I haven't tried to print it yet. I'm thinking that if I can't get a good image in PS, how can I make any colour adjustments, even if it prints ok? I've read tons on colour management, but I don't think I'm quite getting yet....

Thanks!
Doh.

[Doug Nelson]

It looks fine to me, just a tad oversaturated. The blues glow a bit as well (no real greens evident).

I wouldn't worry about what the preview looks like during scanning. That HP software is so limited as to be lame. Just use no processing and 48bit scanning. Consider switching to Lasersoft Silverfast or Vuescan.

Color management is sometimes seen as more voodoo than science, but I can tell you the vast majority of experts recommend sticking with AdobeRGB.

Most of my work is in b/w, so hang around here a bit for other opinions.

[Doh]

Thanks for having a look, Doug. I've fiddled a bit more and even bought a new monitor (I was due, my other one was over 7 years old) but I'm still unable to get a good print from a scan. I guess I'll just have to keep fiddling with things until I get it. I'll have a look at the other scanning software you mentioned. It's the preview that looks good and the final scan that looks crappy. Maybe other software will be better at doing the capture.

Thanks again,

Doh.

[CJ Swartz]

Doh,

I need some more info - are you trying to get the scanner to bring an image into PS6 that won't require any color adjustment BY Photoshop? Or are you just seeing a difference in what you see on the monitor and what prints out on paper?

My scans often need some color adjustment in Photoshop, although I'm getting better at doing some pre-scan adjustments.

The difference between RGB (monitor) and CMYK (printer) has improved for me over the years (trying to get the monitor somewhat calibrated), but I believe that there is always some difference - and that is why Photoshop has the gamut warning and CMYK preview commands. Your image lost the blue in the man's shirt on the right, and some color in the woman's face when I ran the gamut warning. I usually reduce saturation before printing even if the gamut warning doesn't show a problem.

How do others handle the variance between the scan, the monitor image, and the printed image?

[Doh]

Hi CJ,

What was happening was that I was getting a good preview from my scanner, but the acutal image brought in had this funny red colour cast. I've since tried using Vuescan, and I find that the preview isn't that great (it seems to be a bit darker then the final image), but I think I'm getting better colour representation in the final scan.

I've been struggling with a couple of prints that I really want to reproduce. Maybe these just happen to be a couple of tricky choices and I should try the process with a bunch if different prints just to see what (if anything) works and what doesn't.

I have the same questions about workflow. Say you have a colour print you want to scan in. How close to the print is the preview likely to be? Then how close to the print is the actual scan likely to be (after adjustments)? When do you know you have a good scan (if the scan is off from the print)? Then, say you end up doing some colour adjustment in PS. How close to the final print is the proof colours supposed to be? Are the colours usually off by a little but compensated because you know in your head how to correct for the final print? Or do you usually have to print a couple of times to get it right?

Am I just expecting too much?

I also would very much like to hear people's experiences with variance.

[Ed_L]

I don't have any magical words for you. But if you are using Vuescan, I would recommend that you print out the help files (user guide), and read it several times to become familiar with the possible options. That's quite a bit to read, but you'll understand a little better about what's going on.

Ed