I measure both pictures taken indoors of the lady in black hair.
That one you think are to yellow are clearly much better
to print. Skin tones in CMYK are OK (little much yellow)
The other picture have a magenta cast in the skin tones. (reddish) This
one is not good to print. (in a for example newspaper) . Red and magenta
are much stronger and skin tones and are a printing problem. A good role is
to have more yellow than magenta in a skin tone.
If you look at the wall behind the person- VueScan read it as gray. Only you
know if this is right.
Take the gray pipette in NikonScan and make a reading from the wall and se
A common fault in a scanned picture are when a person are in front of a
wall who are white or gray -that the wall often have a cyan cast given from
the scanner and software.
Specially difficult does it get if the scanner software not have a measure
point in the negative who are white, black or gray - than there can be very
strange skin tones.
Best way to solve the problem is to take one picture first where the person
hold a gray scale and color scale in front of them as a reference.
>From: "John Bradbury" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: filmscanners: Skin tones
>Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 16:57:31 -0400
>Using a Nikon LS 3 with both NikonScan 3.1, and the latest version of
>Vuescan I find a wide variation in skin tones under different light sources
>see the images at:
>The film used for both images is Kodak Portra 160 NC. Image 1 is with
>lighting, Image 2 is with fill flash.
>For printing the outdoor shot I used the Nikonscan image with Autolevels
>from PS. The Vuescan image looked dead
>For the Studio shot I used the Vuescan image with autolevels. The Nikonscan
>image is far too yellow
>note how the NikonScan is very warm compared to the cold Vuescan image.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.