Repository navigation
Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
|
oh that's actually a bug/regression. It was possible to copy bounds analysis with ctrl/cmd + shift + c and then paste it but it got lost along the way, I'll make a fix |
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
I prefer to avoid frame-by-frame image analysis or dynamic roll analysis entirely in my film conversion workflow.
In a physical darkroom, photo paper is a static medium. It has no idea what is actually on the negative. When I shoot, I meter for a scene and keep my camera settings locked as long as the ambient light stays the same. Furthermore, I capture every frame on my DSLR scanning setup with completely identical light output and camera exposure settings. Printing those negatives in the darkroom with identical enlarger height, timer, and filtration settings gives consistent density, contrast, and color balance across the roll. Contact sheets are a classic example of this. Every frame shot and scanned under the same conditions renders predictably relative to the next.
The only software I have used that correctly displays this behavior is FilmLab. Like FilmLab, I am fine with the software doing an initial auto color balance and density pass on conversion to get me in the ballpark. However, once those baseline settings are set, FilmLab lets me copy and paste them across frames to get the exact same result, treating the process like a static paper exposure.
The downside with FilmLab is that it seems to use more simplified lookup profiles rather which dont quite simulate the toe and shoulder response as well as NegPy, and it lacks the adjustable ISO-R paper grade controls that make NegPy so useful.
NegPy’s sensitometry engine and paper curves are great, but I hit a wall trying to get this same static behavior. Even with Auto Density and Auto Grade turned off, and all parameters cleared out of the auto settings menu, simple actions like adjusting a crop box still cause subtle color and exposure shifts. It seems like the engine is still re-analyzing the visible region of interest to recalculate baseline parameters rather than letting copied settings act as absolute, static values.
Is there a way (or a setting I am missing) to bypass all image and ROI re-analysis entirely, forcing NegPy to act as a completely static transform pipeline when settings are copied or crops are adjusted?
For context:
I am using NegPy on MacOS ARM.
Sony A7r4 with fixed settings for scanning camera and Cinestill CS-Lite (white light).
Scanning mostly Portra film.
All reactions