Michael Hiles Posted April 22, 2009 Share #41 Posted April 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...by limiting my activities in the digital domain to the equivalent of just working with the exposure and contrast. I sometimes allow a bit of simple burning and dodging' date=' but not much, and I try to do only what I imagine I might have been able to do in a darkroom. The emphasis is then back almost totally on getting the negs right in the first place[/quote'] My approach also. For me, the final goal is a silver print for the wall. So getting the negative right is the only goal. I scan to: - catalogue my images and to be able to find the negative/slide when I want it - play around with brightness, contrast, burning, dodging. I play and plan electronically, make a recipe or game plan for the darkroom and minimize testing. And in my experience, good negatives tend to scan well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 22, 2009 Posted April 22, 2009 Hi Michael Hiles, Take a look here Scanned B&W Workflow. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nei1 Posted April 23, 2009 Share #42 Posted April 23, 2009 I think you must be doing some thing wrong,what scanner are you using.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted April 23, 2009 Author Share #43 Posted April 23, 2009 Nikon 5000 for 35mm. This scanner has a hard time controlling the highlights for neg scanning. For positives, it is a brilliant scanner. But B&W (silver halide), I question its applicability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 23, 2009 Share #44 Posted April 23, 2009 Strange. I have no problem scanning real B&W film with the Coolscan V. I don't blow highlights, and I get good blacks too. At least, I think I do - you may not agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted April 23, 2009 Author Share #45 Posted April 23, 2009 Andy, I have studied your Tri-X Album. Very nice work indeed. Suffice it to say I think you have an optimized film-developer-scanner workflow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 23, 2009 Share #46 Posted April 23, 2009 Thanks. That's appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted April 23, 2009 Share #47 Posted April 23, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nikon 5000 for 35mm. This scanner has a hard time controlling the highlights for neg scanning. For positives, it is a brilliant scanner. But B&W (silver halide), I question its applicability. I'd have another look at your initial decision to scan as a colour positive. Even in your cleaning windows I see same sort of stuff vic vic was delivering (because that is what he liked) and the sort of blocked up ends I get if I scan colour positive when scanning silver based. I know in one of your earlier posts you say you get a good range, and although we cant see the quality of your prints I cant help wonder if you are getting any detail in the ends. Maybe a view stats in Steves profile as well and hunt through his scanned b/w images and see what that turns up. Its interstesting stuff. I am reasonably familiar with delivering what I chose web or electronic viewing, so if it doesnt work it is jsut a bad decision somewhere in the path, but I am a total novice when it comes to what works well for a print so I am pretty interested in all this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share #48 Posted April 24, 2009 If I get a chance tomorrow, I will post the histogram I get when I scan as a color neg, mono neg, and color pos (after inversion in PS) using Nikon Scan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai1 Posted April 24, 2009 Share #49 Posted April 24, 2009 Lately I have been shooting TMax at 1600 developed in TMax developer, scanning with a Nikon ED5000 using Nikon software with color management off, scanned in greyscale, 16 bit with 4x sampling and ICE off, of course. I just do a minor touch up in the scanning software, then apply levels and curves in Photoshop, followed up with Noise Ninja (used very sparingly) and smart sharpen filters. No problems with loss of shadow detail or blown higlights. Play with curves to control that, if that is your problem. Just make sure you have a full scale negative. For film pushed to 1600, grain is very acceptable. The printer will certainly affect the look of the final print, as will the paper you use. In my case, I use an Epson 3800 using ABW with a custom setting to get a more Portriga-like tonal range ( for those of you who remember Portriga). Some will use a separate RIP, but I have been satisfied with ABW so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morten Grathe Posted April 29, 2009 Share #50 Posted April 29, 2009 As I read this tread, it seems that everybody scans the negatives and work them in Photoshop. I like the craft of doing enlargements in the darkroom. Have any of you tried to scan a print in a flatbedscanner? Can you make it look like the original paper? (Purpose: Internet) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted April 29, 2009 Share #51 Posted April 29, 2009 As I read this tread, it seems that everybody scans the negatives and work them in Photoshop. I like the craft of doing enlargements in the darkroom. Have any of you tried to scan a print in a flatbedscanner? Can you make it look like the original paper? (Purpose: Internet) Yes, absolutely. I use a Canon flatbed unit - which I like very much -to scan my negatives. The results are indistinuishable to me between commercial scans made for me on a current model Nikon. The flatbed scanners currently in favour are the Epson units. In my experience, B&W prints from digital files can be beautiful, but they look a little different from prints made in a conventional darkroom. I like the conventional prints better, which matted and framed still have a unique glow not available from any other process. But very many people are happily making digital prints in B&W. If you look at my original posts with pictures, they are all scanned on my Canon, sometimes adjusted a little in Photoshop Elements, and made to look as close to a fine print as I can do. You may not like the pictures, but the scans and "prints" posted have elicited a little favourable comment. But this may not be quite what you asked. I have scanned prints in my Canon. It works fine, but I like scanning negatives better. The negative has a wider tonal range and gives me more to work with when making "fine print" adjustments such as subtle contrast adjustments, etc. For what it is worth, I have none of the scanning problems discussed in this thread (thanks be) - my scans work IMHO perfectly and life is good. And my dog seems to think I am a good guy. Don't give up your darkroom and silver printing. Big mistake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morten Grathe Posted April 29, 2009 Share #52 Posted April 29, 2009 Thanks Michael! I think I will stick to the darkroom, and scan prints for webuse. The Canon-scanners are also quite cheap... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.