I’m following the instructions at the bottom of this post: SilverFast RAW HDR + Negative Lab Pro workflow (new v2.1). When setting gamma to 1.0 in Silverfast with no color profiles embedded, Negative Lab Pro produces some way off results. Using gamma of 2.2 gives me for 48 bit works better, but I’ve noticed it does give me different starting color results compared to a converted “48 bit RAW” from Silverfast. Any hints on what I might be doing wrong here? I saw some minor references to people with the same issue but no definitive feedback. Using a Plustek 8200i. Thanks if anyone can help with my issue.
I don’t recommend scanning at 1.0 gamma.
Why not just use the recommend “48 bit Raw” workflow? You should get the best color results this way, because NLP is then able to use a special raw profile inside Lightroom to get ideal results. You are not doing anything “wrong” when you use a 2.2 gamma Tif - it is just that this method doesn’t allow for as much control over how the colors are processed in Lightroom.
Thanks nate! Appreciate the time. I was not using the 48 bit raw option because for the decades-old film I’m scanning, the iSRD option has been very noticeable. Thus, I followed the instructions at the bottom from the Silverfast guide. I’ve since avoided scanning with gamma at 1.0, and since reverted to scanning at 2.2 with iSRD with pretty great results. The reason I was wondering if I was doing something wrong was because the results were off after following the Silverfast instructions for iSRD.
Here’s a screenshot of the results from scanning with gamma 1.0 for example (original positive scan at the bottom, top left is the result after running the Tiff prep utility, right is the NLP conversion result):
I did do some testing with scanning as Silverfast RAW as TIF files; I’ll test more later on doing the Silverfast RAW scans as DNGs when I get to film that’s cleaner and doesn’t benefit as much from iSRD.