Dilemma over B+W

[richfx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm shooting with an M9 and convert many of my images to B+W using NIK Silver Efex Pro 2. Pretty cool software, but it's still digital versus film.

The thought of shooting in B+W has taken hold, and I'm debating buying an M3 versus holding out for an MM. Developing and scanning costs for the M3 compared to PP with the MM, which I have read is not a breeze to learn (including Leica's inclusion of Silver Efex Pro 2 with the MM, which completely puzzles me) are part of the equation.

Any wisdom and advice here?

[leicaphilia]

Shooting film can be an incredibly rewarding experience when you get it right. But make no mistake...it's not going to be quick and easy like digital capture.

 

An M3 is a perfect film camera. Simplicity defined. Then you need film, obviously. if you buy in bulk and roll your own you can figure about $2.50 a roll. then, you need to develop the film. All you really need is a tank and reel - I use an 8 reel Paterson tank - sone developer and some fixer and a dust free place to hang your negs to dry.

 

Then you need either 1) a darkroom or 2) a decent scanner WITH VUESCAN. I cannot emphasize enough just how important the VUESCAN software is to a good scan. Forget about Silverfast or the bundled software. Its junk. Then you need to post-process in Lightroom or Photoshop.

 

In the end, I find its worth the time. You'll end of with negatives - tangible things you can touch, file, store - instead of 1s an 0s on a hard drive. You can pass them down when you die. Granted, your heirs may throw the entire pile away, but I can assure you nobody is going to care about your hard drive once they put you in the ground, and all your digital files - the evidence that you lived - will be gone forever. That's why I stick with film. Plus, it looks better.

Edited June 18, 2014 by leicaphilia

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

Post processing an MM file is anything but complicated, you just need to have an opinion about how you would like the picture to look. Straight out of the camera the files are rich in tonality but have a fairly linear characteristic curve, so they can look flat and lifeless. Silver Efex is included with the MM because it can be used as your developer, think of it like a developer for film and you wouldn't be far off. And it quickly does lots of complicated things that would take ages to do in Photoshop. So if you want a ready made preset to make your picture look like film, or to add your own grain, then Silver Efex is the best thing to use. It also includes tools not seen in other software for dealing with micro contrast that can make an MM image look very much like film. But it isn't essential, just use Lightroom for contrast and brightness adjustments. The only redundancy in Silver Efex is the colour filter tool, everything else including toning is open for use.

 

There is no point in scaring yourself that the MM is some sort of beast, an M3 (not the best choice) is far more of a demanding beast given the learning curve. To get anything worthwhile on a consistent basis you need to be immersed in film chemistry and processing, and it can be a shock to the system when all the great photographs don't start happening automatically.

 

Steve

Edited June 18, 2014 by 250swb

[Michael Hiles]

Photographing with film takes some commitment, and some learning. Some of the learning comes with the M2/M3/M4, which have no meter. You need to determine exposure. With experience (not years, more likely days or weeks) you can learn lots (I very rarely use a meter). There are approaches and “tricks” that are more than I want to bore you with.

 

The main gap between film and digital is that there is no screen on which to see instant results. This doesn’t bother me at all (I know what my pictures will look like before I pick up the camera). But it rankles most people – and I think this is one of two main reasons that digital has become popular.

 

You might think about what you are intending to achieve. In my case, I want a museum-quality print, mounted, matted and framed, on the wall. Film and conventional printing still is the only way I can achieve what satisfies me. You should assess what you are trying to achieve, and choose the optimum path. Some people using cameras are, in fact, not much interested in pictures (that’s OK), and they focus on equipment, and the related physics and chemistry.

 

Film can be simplified. I use Ilford XP2 pretty much exclusively. Developing the negatives is done by a lab that processes colour film (the process is the same). Included in the price is a quite high resolution scan on a CD. I use the digital images for cataloguing and sharing (and playing with to see what can be extracted from the negative). If you settle on more conventional silver B&W film, learning to process the negatives is a good idea (it gives you control). If kept simple, this is not a huge obstacle – no reason to get excited.

 

When I want a print, I go into my darkroom and make prints. I have spent quite a long time getting to know what a good print looks like (very many people don't), and learning techniques that make me an ever-better printer. It is an ongoing learning process. An alternative route is having a local lab make digital prints from the CD – but they are ink-jet prints (not unreasonable, but not silver). If you want silver prints from a digital file, Ilford Labs Direct will make silver prints from digital files up to very large sizes, and they do a very good job if you send them a good file. There are other digital-to-silver options as well.

 

Someone above suggested NOT an M3. A matter of taste. A good condition M3 has a magnificent viewfinder (some say the best ever). Its drawback is that it does not show 35mm or 28mm frames. For these focal lengths your best bet is an external viewfinder in the accessory shoe. These work very well. There are old 35mm lenses with “goggles” designed for the M3, but they have their drawbacks. The other M film cameras all show the 35mm frames, and some show 28mm. I have, and sometimes use, an M3, but my preference is my M2. It doesn’t much matter, however, since I very rarely use anything but my 50mm.

 

Again, this takes some commitment, and a desire to pursue what film offers. Figure out what you want, then set the goal and the path.

[250swb]

Developing and scanning costs for the M3 compared to PP with the MM,

 

Don't imagine there is no 'post processing' with film. There isn't a worthwhile darkroom image that hasn't had some sort of manipulation, HCB didn't employ a printer just to churn out straight images direct from the negative. To be sure you can leave out the skills of the darkroom, but that's just like producing a digital image without any sort of refinement to help the viewer get the most from it. So even from a scan there is as much if not more post processing needed with a film image to turn it from film to digital and back to film.

 

I'm not telling you this because I'm anti anything, I just used three rolls of film today. But while the quasi semi mystical claptrap about film having some sort of 'extra' quality may be true after being immersed in film usage for many years, it is only an illusion the photographer creates for themselves to be comfortable. Nothing about using film makes it pop out of the box and make a better image than a well crafted digital image will. It is far better to just accept the fun aspect of something new, use film, see what happens, but don't assume beforehand it's the answer to anything, it can be a blind alley where using film becomes more important than making good pictures.

 

Steve

[250swb]

Instead of having a big internal debate about film vs digital, buying an M3 or an MM, go to Ebay and buy a Yashica Electro 35 (excellent lens, rangefinder, etc.) for next to nothing and see if you like film and all its ins and outs before even considering an M3 or MM. That way has no emotional expectation's attached to it, you aren't 'invested' in anything.

 

Steve

[richfx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, everyone. As usual, very thoughtful and incisive perspectives here.

Rich

[richfx]

I've taken the plunge and bought an M7 for my black and white work. It should arrive this week, and I'm both excited and a bit nervous at the new world that lies ahead.

My expected workflow will be to have my B+W negative film developed by a pro lab, then take over from there - scan, import to Aperture, post process and print on my Epson 3880.

It looks like the Plustek OpticFilm 8200 is quite well regarded on the Forum for dedicated 35mm scanning. I plan to use it only for B+W negatives.

Vue Scan also seems to be the preferred software over the Silver Fast package that is bundled with the 8200 models. If that's the case, and I won't be using the Silver Fast software, it would seem that the 8200SE, which is $180 less expensive than the 8200ai ($300 vs $480), is the way to go.

Am I headed in the right direction here or should I pull back and reassess?

Thanks,

Rich

Edited June 28, 2014 by rcerick

[Stealth3kpl]

There's a better option. The 8100. If you're not using c41 B+W, you don't need infra red dust removal. The 8100 is essentially the same as the 8200 but is much cheaper. Perfect for Vuescan.

Pete

[leicaphilia]

I've taken the plunge and bought an M7 for my black and white work. It should arrive this week, and I'm both excited and a bit nervous at the new world that lies ahead.

My expected workflow will be to have my B+W negative film developed by a pro lab, then take over from there - scan, import to Aperture, post process and print on my Epson 3880.

It looks like the Plustek OpticFilm 8200 is quite well regarded on the Forum for dedicated 35mm scanning. I plan to use it only for B+W negatives.

Vue Scan also seems to be the preferred software over the Silver Fast package that is bundled with the 8200 models. If that's the case, and I won't be using the Silver Fast software, it would seem that the 8200SE, which is $180 less expensive than the 8200ai ($300 vs $480), is the way to go.

Am I headed in the right direction here or should I pull back and reassess?

Thanks,

Rich

 

You are correct about Vuescan vs. Silverfast. Vuescan is lightyears better than the bundled Silverfast software.

 

As for the Plusteks, I have a 7400 which works great. Not sure the advantages of other Plustec models over the 7400; maybe someone can enlighten me?

[stevesurf]

I've taken the plunge and bought an M7 for my black and white work. It should arrive this week, and I'm both excited and a bit nervous at the new world that lies ahead.

My expected workflow will be to have my B+W negative film developed by a pro lab, then take over from there - scan, import to Aperture, post process and print on my Epson 3880.

It looks like the Plustek OpticFilm 8200 is quite well regarded on the Forum for dedicated 35mm scanning. I plan to use it only for B+W negatives.

Vue Scan also seems to be the preferred software over the Silver Fast package that is bundled with the 8200 models. If that's the case, and I won't be using the Silver Fast software, it would seem that the 8200SE, which is $180 less expensive than the 8200ai ($300 vs $480), is the way to go.

Am I headed in the right direction here or should I pull back and reassess?

Thanks,

Rich

 

I believe you'll love the simplicity of the M7 and it will free you up to concentrate on various emulsions and workflow. Now, many folks here use the wonderful Tri-X and their own chemistry, which I believe will always give better results at the cost of your time. I actually simplify things and get very inexpensive C-41 developing and scanning to DVD at very low cost done at my local Costco that uses the Fuji Frontier machine, and then have individual negs drum scanned at another lab.

 

The film I use is Ilford XP2 and like I said, it uses ordinary C-41 processing. Then I use LR with the Silver FX plug-in.

 

Yes, not as amazing tonal and dynamic range as MM, but I love the results I get, as I spent the money on M lenses rather than another digital body.

 

I also have found the M8 to be great with B/W and post processed in Silver FX, so perhaps you may add an M8 body as an inexpensive B/W digital.

 

Best of luck with this!

[ravenstor]

Another option open to you is to access a local darkroom. Harman have put together a site especially to enable people to connect with each other and utilise darkrooms. Something maybe to consider at some future point

 

Local Darkroom - Browse All Facilities

 

just use the jump to button to go to your country.

[leicaphilia]

Good advice from Stevesurf: the c-41 b&w films (XP2 Super etc) scan wonderfully, and you can use the IR dust removal feature on your scanner with them.

 

However,, IMO, C-41 B&W scans tend to look very much like digital capture - smooth, grainless, thin. If what you are looking for is the classic, punchy B&W film look, then you should be shooting silver halide films - Tri-X, Arista, HP5, Pan-F etc - and scanning. You won't be able to use the dust removal hardware/software of your scanner, but if you clean your negatives properly prior to scanning it won't really be an issue. Get an anti-static brush and some PEC-12 and you'll be good to go.

 

The other benefit of using traditional B&W film is that you can develop it yourself with a minimum of fuss. All you really need is a darkened room to load the film, a film tank and reel, a bottle of developer and fixer, a few clothespins to hang the film to dry, a scissors and some negative sleeves.

 

For me, part of the joy of doing traditional film photography is being involved in every step of the process - from buying your film in bulk and rolling it (e.g. I always roll my film in 33 exposure rolls, which usually gives me 35 actual exposures, or 7 x 5 exposure negative strips, exactly what will fit in a standard contact sheet sleeve), to shooting it and developing it. You may find this to be the case as well.

 

In any event, best of luck on your film journey. Don't get discouraged; there's a learning curve, and you WILL screw things up, but as you progress you'll the process will become more routine and the mistakes fewer...and the rewards tremendous. And you've bought a helluva nice fim camera in the m7.

 

Good Luck!

[pico]

I've taken the plunge and bought an M7 for my black and white work. It should arrive this week, and I'm both excited and a bit nervous at the new world that lies ahead.

 

You did the right thing. I second Steve's suggestion to get a film that is processed C-41. It is forgiving, and a great way to begin.

.

[MarkP]

You did the right thing. I second Steve's suggestion to get a film that is processed C-41. It is forgiving, and a great way to begin.

.

 

...and I just love the tonality, grain and texture of BN400CN.

It translates very well to scanning and digital post-processing.