I too preferred the top right photo. Arguably, it has less detail in the tree line, the city is neither better or worse, just different, but for me the skyline and sky are far superior with the top right photo.
Maybe this is prejudiced because this is how I remember old photos to be... But then, isn't that the point of scanning old negatives anyway - to recreate what the old images on them would have looked like at the time?
Arguably though, the correct solution is to preserve the source information as much as possible, so similar to what it proposed - scan the images using light sources that correspond to the peaks of the chemicals used in the negative, and then colour grade directly from that using a modified inverted curve.
Doing it that way should permit both outputs by changing the curves used in colour grading, and I suspect the real issue is just "inverting colours" isn't the most appealing visually, just as most professional photos are colour graded to some extent because the raw images don't look as appealing.
Maybe this is prejudiced because this is how I remember old photos to be... But then, isn't that the point of scanning old negatives anyway - to recreate what the old images on them would have looked like at the time?
Arguably though, the correct solution is to preserve the source information as much as possible, so similar to what it proposed - scan the images using light sources that correspond to the peaks of the chemicals used in the negative, and then colour grade directly from that using a modified inverted curve.
Doing it that way should permit both outputs by changing the curves used in colour grading, and I suspect the real issue is just "inverting colours" isn't the most appealing visually, just as most professional photos are colour graded to some extent because the raw images don't look as appealing.