Hi! Just so I understood it correctly. You only set the white balance on the Flat Field calibration frame, ran the Flat Field Correction tool (with all the negatives and calibration frame included), and then changed the white balance off the negatives?
I tried to set the white balance on the Flat Field calibration frame with all of the negatives included/selected (in other words changing the white balance of the negatives in conjuntion with the calibration frame), and then ran the Flat Field Correction tool. Seemed to work out fine aswell. Any experience with doing it that way/order?
After the images have been converted to DNG-files, do you change the input to Vuescan/SF Raw DNG in NLP, or do you leave the input to Digital Camera?
Best regards from a guy who has gone down a rabbithole of Flat Field Corrections adjustments
Andreas, yes, you summed it up correctly. I don’t think the order of setting white balance makes any difference in the process-ultimately the white balance needs to be set on the negative before conversion in NLP. Also, I leave the input set to Digital Camera for conversion.
How is Flat Field Correction working for you? I find it to be incredibly finicky-when it works the results are fantastic but often it will refuse to do anything or even sometimes applies a correction based on a negative rather than the flat field frame.
Yes, true indeed, it is finicky. Yesterday I compared two copies of the same negative, with the exact same conversion settings in NLP (everything set to default) and Flat Field Correction procedure/method. And they seemed to be slightly different, with one negative having somewhat more orange vignetting. Technically they should’ve been the same.
The method that worked best for me was by setting the white balance on the calibration frame in conjunction with the negatives, proceed the Flat Field Correction, and then convert them without further adjustments to the white balance. The colors were a bit off, but the vignetting was completely gone (when it was working atleast).
I haven’t done enough testing to confidently say this is the best way. I’m still in the experimenting phase.
I do a lot of copy work, but didn’t create the reference frame, so probably can’t do this.
Have you tried this on copy work of prints? I have a large project of digital copies of silver gelatin prints, and while the lighting was very accurate, and I was able to use LR’s built-in lens correction, I’m wondering if FFC would help with the images?
Hey Harris, FFC should work for your application but you will have to take a reference frame. If you are using a standard setup for your copy work then you can take the reference frame and apply it to previous photos. Otherwise, you’ll have to be sure to take a reference frame each time you capture copy images.
Hi! Just so I understood it correctly. You only set the white balance on the Flat Field calibration frame, ran the Flat Field Correction tool (with all the negatives and calibration frame included), and then changed the white balance off the negatives?
I tried to set the white balance on the Flat Field calibration frame with all of the negatives included/selected (in other words changing the white balance of the negatives in conjuntion with the calibration frame), and then ran the Flat Field Correction tool. Seemed to work out fine aswell. Any experience with doing it that way/order?
After the images have been converted to DNG-files, do you change the input to Vuescan/SF Raw DNG in NLP, or do you leave the input to Digital Camera?
Best regards from a guy who has gone down a rabbithole of Flat Field Corrections adjustments
Andreas, yes, you summed it up correctly. I don’t think the order of setting white balance makes any difference in the process-ultimately the white balance needs to be set on the negative before conversion in NLP. Also, I leave the input set to Digital Camera for conversion.
How is Flat Field Correction working for you? I find it to be incredibly finicky-when it works the results are fantastic but often it will refuse to do anything or even sometimes applies a correction based on a negative rather than the flat field frame.
Yes, true indeed, it is finicky. Yesterday I compared two copies of the same negative, with the exact same conversion settings in NLP (everything set to default) and Flat Field Correction procedure/method. And they seemed to be slightly different, with one negative having somewhat more orange vignetting. Technically they should’ve been the same.
The method that worked best for me was by setting the white balance on the calibration frame in conjunction with the negatives, proceed the Flat Field Correction, and then convert them without further adjustments to the white balance. The colors were a bit off, but the vignetting was completely gone (when it was working atleast).
I haven’t done enough testing to confidently say this is the best way. I’m still in the experimenting phase.
Thanks for the great post!
I’ve not used FFC yet, but found it by mistake.
I do a lot of copy work, but didn’t create the reference frame, so probably can’t do this.
Have you tried this on copy work of prints? I have a large project of digital copies of silver gelatin prints, and while the lighting was very accurate, and I was able to use LR’s built-in lens correction, I’m wondering if FFC would help with the images?
Thank again!
Hey Harris, FFC should work for your application but you will have to take a reference frame. If you are using a standard setup for your copy work then you can take the reference frame and apply it to previous photos. Otherwise, you’ll have to be sure to take a reference frame each time you capture copy images.