Scanning B&W on Coolscan

[dleibow]

i am scanning 35mm negs with a Nikon Super Coolscan 5000ED. I have been pretty happy with the scans from color negs (mostly Ektar 100.) I am not faring so well with B&W. The scans come out with too much contrast and they have lost detail in both the highlights and the shadows.
Any suggestions on how to manipulate the scan?
Thanks,
David

 

[maddoc]

Which software do you use ? I use the Coolscan 4000ED with Vuescan and like the BW results quite a lot.

 

[dleibow]

software

software

I tried Vuescan, and I also tried the Nikon Software. For color negatives, I prefer the Nikon software, but I will try Vuescan for B&W and see if it is better than Nikon Scan.

 

[Merkin]

try scanning it as a slide and then inverting in photoshop.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

His problem is he is trying to scan BW negs with Digital ICE turned on. That gives that ultra high contrast he's seeing; That's the only way you'll ever get too much contrast from a BW neg scan on a Coolscan, the scans are usually VERY flat and need some curves work in Photoshop to look right. Digital ICE is NOT compatible with BW film. Turn that off and your scans will be fine.

 

[zenlibra]

Here is a link to a great tutorial using vuescan, I use this method and it works very well.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kediwah/sets/72157608202483073/

 

[DerekF]

His problem is he is trying to scan BW negs with Digital ICE turned on. That gives that ultra high contrast he's seeing; That's the only way you'll ever get too much contrast from a BW neg scan on a Coolscan, the scans are usually VERY flat and need some curves work in Photoshop to look right. Digital ICE is NOT compatible with BW film. Turn that off and your scans will be fine.

I thought Vuescan didn't support Digital ICE?

 

[Jamie123]

I have noticed with my Nikon 9000 that I have to dial down the analog gain quite a bit sometimes with bw film or it'll blow out the highlights.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I thought Vuescan didn't support Digital ICE?

Viewscan uses the digital ICE hardware built into the scanner (an infrared light source and infrared sensitive CCD array) but not the ICE software that runs it. Viewscan has its own software to run the ICE system, it works the same. BW negs are incompatible.

 

[mfunnell]

BW negs are incompatible.

Just to be complete for any reading this (I'm sure Chris knows it) Digital ICE works with C-41 B&W like XP2 and BW400CN (my main reason for using those, now, when I need to turn something around faster than I can hand-spot the scans) but does not work for "real" B&W (the stuff I develop myself; which I prefer).

...Mike

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Thanks Mike, I forgot to mention that. I tried to use only C41 BW for a while just for that reason, but I missed having the ability to use 3200 Tmax, and I preferred the tonality of traditional films and liked the ability to develop myself. The C41 films do scan nicely though and ICE works perfect with them.

 

[StaaleS]

In case the OP doesn't know: You must switch off ICE for (non-C41) b&w film because ICE means that the scanner makes a separate IR-light scan to detect dust and scratches, separate from the normal scan, so that it can be removed in an efficient and precise manner by the software. This is a brilliant thing as such but unfortunately the silver particles in the b&w film shows up on this IR scan, the scanner software thinks "hey, dust everywhere!" and pretty much nukes your picture trying to remove it.

 

[ijohnnyz]

Here is a link to a great tutorial using vuescan, I use this method and it works very well.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kediwah/sets/72157608202483073/

Thanks for this. I'm going to give Vuescan another try. Compared to Nikon Scan, I find Vuescan overwhelming. I have been doing it the hard way by using Nikon Scan then adjusting on Photoshop. It would be neat and less time consuming to get a good scan from the start.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

You'll have to adjust in Photoshop anyway. Viewscan gives you a lot less control than Nikon Scan, but it gives FASTER scans and I think better quality scans. Photoshop is just a necessary evil when scanning; no scan software gives usable scans (if you are concerned with ultimate quality) right from the scanner.

 

[Jamie123]

BTW, everyone's still just assuming that he has ICE turned on which may not be the case. Like I said, I also am getting blown out highlights sometimes on properly exposed bw negs unless I dial down the lightsource.

One "trick" I ahve started to experiment with on my Nikon 9000 with 120 film is to place a piece of diffusion foil over the neg (not right on top as it has to be out of the focus plane). It seems to light up the shadows a bit while darkening the highlights at the same time. Tests have been unconclusive so far so don't take my word for it.

(PS: the idea basically derives from the "scanhancer" for the minolta scanners.)

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

The scanhancer was made to reduce grain and dust spots too. I've wondered if a diffuser over the carrier might give those effects on the Nikon scanners. I have the 8000, and I use the rotating glass carrier. What are you using as a diffuser?

If you scan the neg as a transparency, you have almost zero chance of a blown highlight or clipped shadow. I scan as a transparency then invert in photoshop....result is very low contrast but preserves all tones with no clipping...just increase contrast as you wish with curves.

 

[Jamie123]

The scanhancer was made to reduce grain and dust spots too. I've wondered if a diffuser over the carrier might give those effects on the Nikon scanners. I have the 8000, and I use the rotating glass carrier. What are you using as a diffuser?

If you scan the neg as a transparency, you have almost zero chance of a blown highlight or clipped shadow. I scan as a transparency then invert in photoshop....result is very low contrast but preserves all tones with no clipping...just increase contrast as you wish with curves.

I have tried the matte plastic from a slide "sleeve" once and also once some sort of translucent paper. Nothing scientific so far. However, I'm getting some new pieces of glass (regular and ANR) for my standard holder and when I get them I'll do some more tests with proper diffusion foil.
Not sure if it reduces grain and dust spots but it's worth a try.

Thanks for the tip about scanning as a slide. I'll make sure to give this a try next time!

 

[craygc]

I have noticed with my Nikon 9000 that I have to dial down the analog gain quite a bit sometimes with bw film or it'll blow out the highlights.

Use Vuescan and lock the film base and you will never have this problem... It will anchor your black-point and with B&W films having a dynamic range of around 2.0 at most, so you will never blow out your highlights through scanning with the Nikon.

 

[Jamie123]

Use Vuescan and lock the film base and you will never have this problem... It will anchor your black-point and with B&W films having a dynamic range of around 2.0 at most, so you will never blow out your highlights through scanning with the Nikon.

I have given Vuescan a try more than once and have found that Nikon Scan gives me better results with color neg (and the interface is easier). Haven't tried BW as I use mostly color. I may give it another go with the trial version but the results with bw will have to really blow me away for me to spend that money for this special purpose only.

 

[valdas]

i agree with others - make sure ICE is off. I also did not like the result with Nikon soft, however i'm very happy with Silverfast.