Post process B&W film

[Nick--]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hope this is the correct forum, questions seems to fall between the two. I have just shot my first roll of film and am very happy to get a couple of pictures I like. I have a couple of others where the exposure is off and I wondered if people do any digital post processing of scans. One of the reasons I’m trying film is to get away from computers.

I had the film HP5+400 developed at a lab and they also provided the untouched jpegs below.
 

Is most of the image set in stone once the film is developed or is there latitude in the scanning phase, or even in Lightroom after scanning?

Here are two examples. The one with the bike seems to be lacking contrast - overexposed? And the second is too dark, maybe the exposure range is too great to capture everything in this scene anyway. I had planned expose for the stall owner, but the bright sign seems to have fooled me.

I’m here to learn, so don’t worry about telling me where I’ve gone wrong.

M6 Classic 0.85 | 50mm f2 | ComeThroughLab

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

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

[TomB_tx]

You certainly can improve both with post processing, even after scanning. Before digital we would do a lot of fixes while enlarging - dodging over exposed areas and burning in areas that were too light. You often did more work during enlarging to make the picture work as when you set the camera to take the photo.

You can do the same kinds of things editing in computer. Even simple photo apps allow adjusting highlights, midrange, and dark areas independently.

I don't like to spend time on computer adjusting photos, (I work too much on a computer programming, etc.), so I use simple tools to make adjustments quickly. Never cared for Photoshop, or the new versions of Lightroom - so I just use the tools that came with Windows or Office. They work for me. I take snapshots to capture what I see, not to make them into something else.

[adan]

There is scanning, and then there is scanning.

Lab scans by default are usually in a "consumer format" like 8-bit .jpg - and there is less room to adjust with that limited format (only 256 gray levels to begin with, and perhaps only 2000 x 3000 pixels (six megapixels).

Some labs may offer .tif scans (less compressed), with higher resolution, and even in 16-bit bit-depth (256 times more information/gray-levels per pixel) for massaging in post-processing.

My gold standard in using my own scanner, with Vue-Scan software - which allows me to output 16-bit "raw" .DNG files (same as a digital Leica produces) that slide right into the same post-processing workflow (open and adjust with Adobe Camera Raw, and then even more in Photoshop).

Home "scans" done with a digital camera + 1:1 macro-lens also provide such high-data images (up to sixty megapixels, these days), that can be massaged and processed to great effect in PhotoShop or whatever.

..........................

Just for grins - here is what Photoshop could "suck out" of your shopfront picture, even in its 8-bit, many-times-compressed uploaded condition, with adjustments for: overall shadows/highlights improvement; overall contrast;  a little local "dodging" or lightening of the storekeepers face; and some healing or retouching of white dust specks/jpeg artifacts (little "American Flag" striped patches) here and there in the dark areas.

In 5 minutes. (But I've been doing this for 50 years overall, 30 years with scans - practice helps!)

Not necessarily what you personally want, but how much latitude was available. Click image,and then click again, to see full-resolution version.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited September 10, 2023 by adan

[spydrxx]

IMHO every picture I shoot, film or digital is a candidate for potential post processing of some sort, if only minor cropping.

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, spydrxx said:

IMHO every picture I shoot, film or digital is a candidate for potential post processing of some sort, if only minor cropping.

I completely agree. Getting the right moment is my main concern when the subject is moving. Making sure I cover the subject with the right angle and choice of aperture + shutter time is my main goal for any still life. Of course I select my keepers with some potential before investing more time in a shot. 

I took the effort of seeing the shot in the first place. Sometimes a lot of tries and patience are needed for that. And in some I manage to focus correctly and get it mostly right like I wanted. Now it is worth a bit of my time to make it really shine. I always shoot RAW (or scan with camera in RAW) to keep all the options open.

Because the M is providing just an indication of the frame, I do not mind cropping in PP and I do not bother too much when I am shooting.

Then adjust lighting and white balance, contrast etc... It takes a few minutes to get that right. My advise is to use a good non-destructive PP tool to do that. Lots of people are using Lightroom, others Capture One Pro, and a lot of other cheaper or free options are available. I rarely use the power of PP to hide or heal reality, so I rarely need the power of Photoshop. I chose C1P because it has all I need (and more) inside the same package, and I offers a standard buy option in stead of Adobe's subscription model.

Edited September 10, 2023 by dpitt

[250swb]

11 hours ago, Nick-- said:

 

Here are two examples. The one with the bike seems to be lacking contrast - overexposed? And the second is too dark, maybe the exposure range is too great to capture everything in this scene anyway. I had planned expose for the stall owner, but the bright sign seems to have fooled me.

 

The key thing is that you can see the problem and have seen that exposure and the latitude of the film don't always equate to the balanced image you saw in your minds eye.

I always do some post processing of film scans just as I used to spend hours dodging and burning prints in the darkroom. And while I now do it within Photoshop and the Nik Suite plugin I basically do exactly what I did in the darkroom. For perspective if I had a contrasty negative I'd choose a low contrast grade of paper, I'd chose a developer that works well with it. I'd do test strips to make a decision about the basic exposure, and I'd dodge (reduce the amount of light) and burn (increase the amount of light) on given areas of the photo to bring out shadows, darken highlights, and visually balance the image like darkening the sky etc. These are all types of manipulation and everybody did it to make a darkroom print, so don't ever think 'post processing' are dirty words. 

So do fire up Lightroom and learn to use the brightness/contrast and the dodging and burning tools as a basic first step, it will become second nature and for simple adjustments like those needed in your photos it will only take a minute or two. It's also satisfying knowing you've made the most of your photographs. I should add you only need to do this with the good ones, not the whole roll 🙂 Also follow the great advice already given in this thread.

Edited September 10, 2023 by 250swb

[Nick--]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, adan said:

..........................

Just for grins - here is what Photoshop could "suck out" of your shopfront picture, even in its 8-bit, many-times-compressed uploaded condition, with adjustments for:

 

That’s incredible how much detail was still in an 800KB jpeg! Thanks for showing what can be done and sharing the techniques. 

The scans from the lab are much larger, 6048x4011, so I’ll definitely spend sometime evaluating the images, particularly the underexposed ones that I completely discounted earlier.

Like others have said, getting the best shot possible first is what I’ll be learning. Having used digital for so long, and relying on auto focus and having an iso I can shift every picture, plus being able to review histograms has made me rarely thing about the exposure before shooting.

looking forward to taking many more pictures with film.

[Nick--]

3 hours ago, dpitt said:

I completely agree. Getting the right moment is my main concern when the subject is moving. Making sure I cover the subject with the right angle and choice of aperture + shutter time is my main goal for any still life. Of course I select my keepers with some potential before investing more time in a shot. 

 

I agree, getting an interesting image in the street, where people are moving is pretty challenging and to nail focus and exposure at the same time makes it pretty tough.

I’ll do some post processing too.

like everything, I just need to practice with film a lot. Perhaps gave a note book so I can remember the settings and why I chose them too.

[Nick--]

2 hours ago, 250swb said:

 I should add you only need to do this with the good ones, not the whole roll 🙂 Also follow the great advice already given in this thread.

What makes you think I didn’t take 36 amazing pictures? 😀

it’s interesting to hear about how this was all done in the dark room previously, and so gives me an acknowledgement that shooting film, doesn’t mean I have to get everything perfect in the camera.

 

[Nick--]

Thank you to everyone that helped and answered my post in this thread, and other threads I’ve posted recently as I start to learn about film.

It’s a great community of generous people, enjoying, learning and teaching photography at all levels.

[Nick--]

I bought an old Nikon Coolscan V ED, and I get much better scans that’s from the developer I used for the film. I’m guessing they set a single exposure across the roll, but I was all over the place.