Color negatives are not very troublesome for shooting or for scanning. That is the reason why the overwhelming majority of photos taken in the past have been shot with negative film. For the purpose of scanning, these films have advantages, too. Even an inexpensive scanner can yield acceptable results when color images are scanned. One disadvantage is that the film base for color negatives is susceptible to scratches. You can get good scans from color negatives only if you use a scanner with good hardware-based scratch removal.

When looking at the inverted filmstrip with the orange masking, it is difficult to predict how the final image will appear. Even proper exposure and sharpness are difficult to judge. This shows that it is not easy to sort out unusable shots. The characteristics of film emulsions are as manifold as the offerings of color negative films. The data read by the scanner must be interpreted accordingly, and the result of scanning depends greatly on the settings of the scanning software. Matching the original film, in this case, is much more difficult than it is for slides. Up to the moment there is no calibration possible for color negatives, i.e., USAF-1951 only works with slides. Additionally, the scanning process for negatives takes longer than for slides because conversion from a negative to a positive image requires more processing effort.

The color correction of scans can be automated partly in scanning software, which supports film profiles, but it is not very reliable. Silver-Fast and VueScan ship with a large number of profiles for common film types. Nikon Scan has only one standard profile for negatives.

In a purely analog workflow, slides offer the maximum obtainable image quality. Slides offer much more vivid images than color negatives; their contrast range is clearly higher. However, slides demand accurate exposure from the photographer as there is little margin for error. Even a small exposure error affects the image. In comparison, one has much more leeway with exposure when using color negative film. The processing lab has little impact on the image result when working with slides. With negatives, it is a different matter. Slides are superior to negatives because they have finer grain, more contrast, better color depth, and a much better density range. For scanning, slides are more demanding than negatives. For example, scanning slides using low-end scanners often leaves much to be desired, since such scanners cannot typically handle the wide range of colors, contrast, and density inherent in the slides. On the other hand, a great advantage of scanning slides is that the image on the monitor can be compared directly with the original. Scanning slides is also faster than scanning negatives since there is no need for processor-intensive image conversion when slides are scanned.

Coolscan IV: Scanned with a setting for standard slide film, this Kodachrome slide has a blue color cast.

Coolscan IV: The same slide, but scanned with a setting for Kodachrome, this slide has neutral colors.

Image: Peter Steinhoff, ca. 1970

Setting a Coolscan 5000 to Kodachrome produces the most vivid colors.

Kodachrome films are color transparency films that have been on the market for more than half a century. They are not developed with the common E-6 process, but rather with the special K-14 process from Kodak. There are still good reasons for professional photographers to use Kodachrome:

These films cannot be scanned in the same way as the common E-6 color slide films. They can be scanned like normal color slides, but with only modest results. You will get a good scan only if the scanning software offers a special setting for Kodachrome. If you scan Kodachrome with an E-6 setting, the images will have a bluish cast, and generally the colors will be less than satisfactory. Hardware-based scratch removal systems such as ICE or FARE, which were developed for E-6 and C-41 films, work for Kodachrome, but only partially. If you use scratch removal anyway, expect some loss in image detail.

In general, scanning black and white negatives is problematic. As with color negatives, black and white negatives suffer from dust and scratches; but in this case, hardware-based scratch removal does not work at all. Neither ICE nor FARE function properly for black and white negatives; they actually degrade image quality. However, ICE and FARE work for black and white films based on the C-41 developing process. These films are closer in technology to color film; therefore, the infrared beam used in ICE and FARE can scan the surface for dust and scratches. These films are called “chromogenic” color films, such as the Ilford XP2 Super, Kodak BW400CN, Konica Monochrome VX 400, Tura BW-C41, and Fujifilm Nexia Sepia. Traditional black and white films such as the Kodak T-MAX family are silver-based.

The type of slide mount has a big effect on the quality of the scanned image. Slide mounts with glass inserts are not suitable for scanning, and should be replaced before scanning in order to avoid significant loss of sharpness.

Slides mounted behind glass stay flat, which at first glance seems equally advantageous for both projection and scanning. With scanning it prevents popping of the slides and keeps the surface even. However, for scanning, the glass layer is an additional obstacle when it comes to image quality – even more so with anti-Newton glass mounts. If you want a good-quality scan of your glass-mounted slides, it will be necessary to remount your slides into glassless frames. This applies to single and double-sided glass frames. Unlike slides that are projected, slides will not “pop” in modern scanners since they do not heat up.

Uncut transparency strips are perfect for batch scanning.

Glassless mounts are ideal for scanning, since there are no troublesome glass layers involved. In many cases, however, flatness of the film is a problem. Mounts are necessary to ensure good flatness. Machine-mounted slides from the lab are usually firmly fixed and do not buckle. Other mounts, such as those used with the Hama DSR system, do not offer any locators for the film. Wess has addressed this problem by developing several mounts with a tensioning feature; but they are all rather expensive and may be difficult to find. It is usually sufficient to purchase a single pack of mounts, as you will only be using them for scanning but not for actual archiving. As far as I know, these mounts are only available at www.filmscanner.info. The www.wess-diarahmen.de site is no longer online.

Images: Wikimedia Commons

These slide frames are from 1942, but you can still handle them with every up-to-date film scanner.