Brings back the days of helping my Dad process colour and print them in the darkroom. It took hours to get just one print as we had to do colour balancing test strips as well as exposure ones, changing the gelatin filters in the enlarger each time. At least by scanning the negatives you can colour balance by seeing it immediately instead of processing for 10-15 minutes just to find out you altered the filters the wrong way! Oh the memories.
I used to do that too Richard - but I had a Durst C65 enlarger with a rather primitive colour head that you could dial in the filtration (on just two channels if I remember rightly). You still had to do colour test strips - but I made many, many colour prints with that setup. I remember having a crack at Cibachrome printing too ... but that was super expensive on paper if I remember rightly.
@@ashsphotolounge Yes we did cibachrome too. We had consistently good results from that process. The images were always sharp and punchy probably because they were off slides that tended to be contrasty anyway. Like you say expensive though.
@@richarddodd9507 Yep Cibachrome was wonderfully punchy - Kodachrome slides printed on Cibachrome paper absolutely knocked your eyeballs out! I remember especially the clarity of the whites and pumped up blue skies.
I did as recommended by Neg Lab Pro, and sampled the film base in Lightroom and then applied that to the 'negative' before conversion in Lightroom - then used Neg Lab Pro to convert and fine tune. The way I am reading their instructions, the 'basic filter pack' as I would have called it back when I printed colour, is determined prior to using Neg Lab Pro in Lightroom. It seems a bit kak-handed, but they do have lots of tools for correcting once you've converted - almost too many for a poor CMYK educated geezer 🙂
Brings back the days of helping my Dad process colour and print them in the darkroom. It took hours to get just one print as we had to do colour balancing test strips as well as exposure ones, changing the gelatin filters in the enlarger each time. At least by scanning the negatives you can colour balance by seeing it immediately instead of processing for 10-15 minutes just to find out you altered the filters the wrong way! Oh the memories.
I used to do that too Richard - but I had a Durst C65 enlarger with a rather primitive colour head that you could dial in the filtration (on just two channels if I remember rightly). You still had to do colour test strips - but I made many, many colour prints with that setup. I remember having a crack at Cibachrome printing too ... but that was super expensive on paper if I remember rightly.
@@ashsphotolounge Yes we did cibachrome too. We had consistently good results from that process. The images were always sharp and punchy probably because they were off slides that tended to be contrasty anyway. Like you say expensive though.
@@richarddodd9507 Yep Cibachrome was wonderfully punchy - Kodachrome slides printed on Cibachrome paper absolutely knocked your eyeballs out! I remember especially the clarity of the whites and pumped up blue skies.
I was under the impression that Negative Lab Pro was able to colour correct/adjust? Did you have to feed in the colour of the negative base?
I did as recommended by Neg Lab Pro, and sampled the film base in Lightroom and then applied that to the 'negative' before conversion in Lightroom - then used Neg Lab Pro to convert and fine tune. The way I am reading their instructions, the 'basic filter pack' as I would have called it back when I printed colour, is determined prior to using Neg Lab Pro in Lightroom. It seems a bit kak-handed, but they do have lots of tools for correcting once you've converted - almost too many for a poor CMYK educated geezer 🙂