RAW Scanning in Vuescan

[@johnwinslow6962]

The TIFF and DNG raw scanning is for later rescanning without the scanner. You scan from file using Vuescan.

[@ariloguecom]

at 8:14 (when raw file chosen) came lots of options. one of them is "Raw DNG format". did you test it or did you compare it between "Tiff DNG format" ?

[@Bussmicke2305]

😍 Very nice video. What i dont udnerstand is why are the Tiff DNG photos brigther in Lightroom then they are inte Vuescan. Can you explane that for me?

[@christophercrawford777]

Most image editing software, including Lightroom and Photoshop, automatically gets your monitors color profile from the operating system and uses it to accurately display images on the screen. Vuescan does not. You have to set it manually in Vuescan. Under the COLOR tab, look for a pull-down menu that says MONITOR COLOR SPACE. Choose ICC PROFILE. Another setting will appear below that, where you choose the profile for your screen by navigating to the folder where your computer keeps ICC profiles. I am assuming you have your screen calibrated. If not, then all this is a waste of time because neither Vuescan nor Lightroom will display images accurately on an uncalibrated screen.

[@Bussmicke2305]

@@christophercrawford777 i have calibrated my monitor ones. This confusing me: Tiff files looks the same in Vuescan and Lightroom. Tiff DNG looks brighter i Lightroom than Vuescan. Why is that.

[@christophercrawford777]

@@Bussmicke2305 TIFF DNG is a raw file format, like those produced by digital cameras. Because raw files have to be interpreted by the software, a raw file can look different in brightness, contrast, color, and even resolution in different raw conversion programs.

[@smd1uk]

I've been scanning with Vuescan and outputting raw DNG files for some years. I've found that none of the Vuescan settings makes any difference to the raw file as Vuescan is outputting the data directly from the scanner without any processing.

[@irvingl.7662]

Yes, I've done a lot of test, the results are same.

[@Bussmicke2305]

Hmm, thats why my Photoshop looks soo bright

[@JMSteger]

After I scan a slide from my scanner using the raw DNG format and 64 bit RGBi. I then re-scan that file using File as my source in Vuescan as a DNG also at 64 bit RGBi. This second scan allows me to take advantage of the Infrared Clean in Vuescan which I find works better than the Dust and Scratches filter in Photoshop.

[@ghosttownsentinel5288]

I don't see the point in changing the output to DNG in this experiment. The one that you said was the wrong output, frankly, looked better. Lifting the shadows in the first version brought out a lot of details, and was equal or better than the DNG version, and had a bit more saturation. Compare 12:36 to 14:38. Even a blind man can see the first version has more oomph without much correction. Something doesn't compute!

[@kevinwhite2380]

I may be a bit late(!!) to this party? But I'm currently scanning slides from my Epson 1640 Photo :-) - I WILL be updating soon to the Epson V850 :-) However - I noticed you mention there is 'No' real difference between 'Media' set as 'Image' or 'Slide Film'!!! - That may(?) be the case But, if you select 'Slide Film', 'Color Negative' or 'B/W negative', then move to the Color' tab... - You can now select the 'Vendor', 'Brand' & 'Type' of film you are scanning :-) This may make subtle differences to the 'Colour' (I'm from the UK!!) and/or 'Hue' of the scanned images :-) I hope this helps ?? :-)

[@neilhennigan6671]

You seem to have missed the point of a Vuescan RAW (.TIF) file. It is meant to provide files from which you can rescan over and over again, as though you are rescanning the actual slide. Vuescan RAW files are "unprocessed" by even Vuescan, which is why they are often very dark. If you select certain settings (like color, filters, etc.), Vuescan will ignore them when outputting to RAW. Vuescan RAW makes it possible for you to make any adjustments, apply any filters, and to output to any format(s) that you want, as many times as you want without ever again having to touch a slide (or film). Output to any other format limits you to just that format (without potential quality loss), and you can't undo any adjustments or filters that you have applied. Our 64 bit Vuescan RAW files at 5000 resolution are about 415 MB, but very worth having. They are to be opened in Vuescan only ("Scan From File"), and you can "scan" and output to whatever format you need.

[@christophercrawford777]

I did this video to help someone who wanted to use the RAW files in Photoshop or Lightroom. You're right about what the RAW options were designed for, but as I found in trying to answer the question I was asked, the RAW files can be used in other software, too.

[@neilhennigan9596]

Nope. And good luck working with a 48 bit or 64 bit file in Photoshop in general. There's no point to any Vuescan RAW at under 64 bit. You need that infrared level. While you may be able to open them in other software, you're not going to do much more than that. Other RAW outputs may work fine for you, but only a moron would save directly to one of those (unless saving both at the same time). Whatever.. do it any way you please. But post accurate information.

[@christophercrawford777]

Neil Hennigan Like I said, I made this video to answer a question someone sent me. I don't work this way, but someone wanted to, and I was curious, so I helped him. That's what I'm doing here, helping people. I'm not sure where your hostility is coming from, but I found in my time as a high school teacher that there are some people who simply have to go through life treating others badly. I had students who acted like that, and some of them did it to the wrong kid and ended up in the hospital. As I told my students so often, it is much easier in life to be kind to others. You should try it sometime.

[@davidseddon2690]

This is interesting. I am about to buy a film scanner - mainly for slides (thinking of the Plustek 135i or the Reflecta RPS). Unlike most people here, I use DXO Photolab4 not Photoshop or Lightroom. I find it great for my digital needs, but I suspect it would prefer me to import into it as a .dng or raw file of some sort. Anyone else use DXO? Are we saying here, btw, that for the best possibilities for processing options, scanning slides in Vuescan at one .raw type or another would be often better than .tiff? From the above discussions, if that's the case, I am not at all sure which of the discussed raw files would be best for use in DXO - still, unlike you folks, I have not started out yet and am considering my options. I could also spend money on SilverFast, but from what I seem to be gleaning actually, I'd probably have more than enough processing power with Vuescan and DXO (I also have the latest Photoshop Elements)

[@patriciaarmell2138]

I scanned the same slide 3 different ways and got 3 different results(all other settings the same): the lightest was using the TIFF DNG format within the TIFF file option; the darkest was using the .tif default within the Raw file option. When I checked the Raw DNG format within the Raw file option, the photo lightness was in between (Goldilocks ha!).

[@rayray7561]

Do you still know the size difference between the tiff file and the dng?

[@MarcusFrostholm]

So what are the difference between the dng raw file and Tiff file?? Increase in dynamic range? Less noise when you open up the shadows? Difference in resolution and file size?

[@JNAStudio]

Giant Reset button in Lightroom...

[@wdm213]

All- Read The Comments for more user insights.

[@tomheckhaus7617]

Hello Chris, your videos are very insightful and well done. I have a few thoughts on this particular RAW video. As you go through the list of choices you mention that one choice is PDF. You go on to say PDF is a text file. Yes & No. I have been using Adobe Photoshop since version 1.1 on a floppy disk. I now use CS5. Originally Adobe used PDF to describe their proprietary image file. We may want to ask the folks at Vuescan if this option saves files in the old original Image-PDF file. These days of course PDF is synonymous when used with Adobes text or (P)ortable (D)ocument (File). Usually Adobe warned you that if you needed to save a file with embedded layer and other color data it had to be saved as a PDF file. The PDF file maintained all the layer and other information. I guess you' have to say that Adobes original image PDF was a RAW Adobe file. I am a senior so I hope that explained it rather than confuse the issue. Thanks Tom See my comment on your slide scanning video.

[@christophercrawford777]

You're confusing PDF with PSD. PSD is the Adobe Photoshop File Format. PDF, which is what Vuescan offers, is the Portable Document File.

[@mantasbartasevicius3553]

But the biggest problem with dng profile is that it compress the image and you can see strange pixel pattern when you zoom in

[@DavidRDarrow]

TIFF is a format for storing every pixel value indivdually in the file. There's nothing wrong with it being assigned as a RAW or DNG, just as there is nothing wrong with a CR2 being converted to DNG. you did not play enough with the TIFF/DNG, and missed the benefit of RAW mistaking it for being too dark. RAW scan capture the film as exposed, and is the BEST way to get every bit of data available. "Too dark" is a misunderstanding. You had almost the lattitude of an HDR image in one exposure.