Scanning B&W

[xrogers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I scan black and white medium format with the venerable Polaroid 120 (still available as the MicroTek 120, I think)---I haven't seen anything better for a price I can afford, so have no reason to change. I have used Silverfast in the past, but it shows bands of blur at the Polaroid's highest resolution that are not present when using either Polaroid's software or VueScan.

 

So my medium format workflow is to shoot tmax 100, develop in Xtol, and scan on the Polaroid with VueScan. I scan using a glass carrier as high as 4000 dpi (giving me a 8000x10000 very high quality pixels), 16 bit grayscale. I've tried RGB scanning numerous times, and found no perceptible difference. I have also scanned 8-bit, but because I prefer to apply curves and such outside the scanning software, really need the 16-bit file.

 

The Polaroid has a diffuse light source that provides excellent sharpness with a bit less visible dust. Retouching dust on these scans can take a while. I've tried other films, hoping to find a color film that gives the incredible detail of the tmax, and failed. I like this workflow enough that I don't think I'll bother trying anything else until the tmax is no longer made.

 

This is why I expect to be scanning for at least the next ten years---I can get 80 megapixel resolution from a small, light, reliable Mamiya 7, and get tack sharp results all the way out to the corners even with super wide lenses (these lenses are fantastic!).

 

For 35mm, I use a CoolScan V (it has easier film handling than the Polaroid). I use either VueScan or NikonScan, 16 bit grayscale. There I'm shooting either trix or delta 100 (strange---I strongly prefer tmax to delta in 120, and strongly prefer delta to tmax in 35mm). Delta 100 in 35mm provides great sharp detail when I need it, and trix is simply beautiful.

 

I used to scan this stuff on an Epson 1680 graphics arts flatbed. There the RGB scan provided visibly better results, but I haven't done that in years.

 

For printing black and white, I use either the darkroom, but more often these days an Epson printer. Epsons like 180 or 360 dpi, anything different and the driver performs interpolation. If you use a Canon printer, go for 300 dpi to avoid driver interpolation (this is where the recommendations for 300 and 360 come from).

 

Also, I use all these same tools for color scanning, but have to admit I've found no color film that I like to scan. I prefer and use digital when the color matters. Maybe I'll try out the newest Portra and see if it can change my mind...

 

Until later,

 

--clyde

[charlesphoto99]

Except for the fact you own an Imacon and I don't, we have very similar perspectives and workflows

 

But assuming I have a good scan, I'm curious about your printing method. I use a 4000 with Image Print, and have just relegated it to rolls of canvas. I picked up a 3800 to print that Crane silver rag and the H. Fine Art Pearl (and I was talking to the Moab president and they have a fiber-like pearl paper coming too--different that the others).

 

Anyway, do you find you still need ImagePrint with the K3 inks? Just curious. I love it, but I heard the new Epson drivers were just as good....

 

Agreed completely on the Alien Skin stuff. It's very, very good.

 

Hi Jamie,

 

I probably don't need the Imageprint but I purchased it at the same time as the printer so for the $ it cost I'm gonna use it! One of the reasons i bought it was to use their phatte black system where one could have both matte and photo black inks in the 4800 at the same time. Great in theory, but it turns out the prints have bronzing without the LLK inkset so I went back to just photoblack and have given up printing matte.

 

The nice thing about the Imageprint is one doesn't need to convert the grayscale images to RGB. The driver uses as little of the color inks as possible to make a good b&w print. I also like the access to hundreds of profiles. But I wouldn't say it's entriely neccessary _ i probably wouldn't do it again and have nop plans to upgrade to the latest version.

[Guest Metroman]

I remember I was impressed with Silverfast but what blew it for me was having to buy a licence for each scanner. I scan 35mm B&W on a Coolscan V ED and MF on an Epson V750 Pro. Usually 16 bit greyscale, 300dpi for a maximum print of 10 x 8.

 

Not sure whether the Silverfast licensing has changed now but Vuescan Pro was the better option for me.

[cocker]

I remember I was impressed with Silverfast but what blew it for me was having to buy a licence for each scanner.

 

Not sure whether the Silverfast licensing has changed now but Vuescan Pro was the better option for me.

 

Andy,

 

I use Silverfast and agree that the licensing is annoying. It's not easy to find on their website but they do offer a discount for upgrading - cross-grading if you already have one licence and want to use a different scanner. I think it takes off just a little less than half the cost so does ease the pain a little. I've just got the Epson V750 and am very pleased with it. I got the "free" wet Mount frame from Epson last week and now need to track down supplies of fluid and mylar to try it out. Have you done this?

[Guest Metroman]

Keith: When I got mine last year the Wet Mount kit was extra and I couldn't see myself using it that much so cannot help there.

 

However, if you haven't already seen this it may help source supplies:

 

Epson V750 Pro wet mount

[cocker]

Thanks Andy - that's helpful.

 

best wishes