FTOG
•
Senior Member
•
Posts: 1,359
Lossless image inversion of RAF files for film scanning? (C1, SilkyPix...)
1 month ago
Hi all,
recently, I've been developing some of my decades old (don't ask...) film backlog and as a replacement for the tedium of flatbed scanning - to get a 4 MPix image... - I've started trying out taking images of my b&w negatives on a light plate.
I'm using an X-E3 with an adapted lens and extension tube for the time being. My OS is Windows 10.
Here's where I ran into what I assumed would be a minor obstacle: image inversion.
C1 22 Pro
My regular software of choice is C1 22 Pro. I was surprised that there is no option to invert an image at the click of a button. To arrive at a base image, here are my preliminary steps:
- Base Characteristics Tool; Curve: Linear Response
- Curve Tool (RGB):
- Curve Point: Input 0, Output 255
- Curve Point: Input 255, Output 0
Luckily this can easily be applied to any number of images at the same time and now my images are "correct" where black is black and white is white.
Background Layer, note inverted curve tool (exposure reduced 1 stop from SOOC shot)
But what confuses/annoys me is that now all exposure related tools are "upside down". Want to reduce brightness? Increase the value of the exposure etc. This even applies to adjustment layers on top of the background/base image.
Adjustment Layer, note "regular" curve and 1 stop "brighter" exposure slider on adjustment layer
Is this really the only way of inverting an image in C1? In the long run, this might do my head in...
Silky Pix - Raw File Converter 3.0
I'm not keen to generally move to another software, but would be willing to incorporate an additional step into my workflow for my analogue images. So my next angle of attack was to see if I could somehow invert the RAF file and convert it to TIFF or PNG, before continuing normally in C1.
To get decent demosaicing, I thought I might give Fuji's Silky Pix Raw File Converter (v3.0) a try. Aside from being a bit sluggish, a clunky GUI and questionable localisation ("initialising" settings means resetting them to defaults, apparently), maybe it could work. There's batch processing, you can import/save development parameters and there is, of course, a curve tool.
Should work, right? Wrong.
Note curve correction Input 254 Output 0; false colour bottom left and at top of the frame (Image isn't flipped here yet - no such functionality)
The curve tool won't allow points at 0 and 255 respectively. 1 and 254 are the respective ends of where adjustment points can be placed. Data outside these ranges will cause false colours, see above.
I've attempted brute forcing an adjustment at 0 and 255 by exporting the development parameters (user "taste", gotta love the localisation ), editing the resulting file and importing the development parameters back into the program. Unfortunately this will either result in no changes in the curve at all or an entirely black frame.
Other options
There've been a few more options I've looked into:
- darktable: The GUI does not appeal to me at all and I'd rather not have to import each batch of "scans" into a catalogue.
- Irfanview: Used as a light/fast viewer, great batch processing. Unfortunately when batch processing RAF files, the program will only use the embedded preview image, not the demosaic'ed (is that a word?) raw data. So I end up with a low res, low headroom file - that was quickly and efficiently inverted.
- Iridient X Transformer: No option to invert image in conversion process.
What I am looking for
Ideally I'd like a light program that can apply the following steps to a batch of files:
- Import & demosaic RAF file
- Ideally with side car files or other means that do not involve import into a catalogue
- Invert image
- Optional: horizontal flip (to correct negative orientation in scanning process)
- Export as DNG or TIFF
Does anyone have a recommendation how to best achieve these rudimentary(?) steps? I know C1 would nearly get me there, but it really isn't convenient to have to consider every edit "upside down".
Thanks for any recommendations/thoughts!
PS: What an odd convention that it's still considered a "scan" of a film, although no scanner is involved in the process.