B&W film is obselte if you're going to scan the negatives

nanthor said:
Avotius, great shot, nice 3d effect, can you share your camera, lens, film, etc. info with us? Thanks, Bob.
Click to expand...

Camera: Voigtlander R2a
Lens: Voigtlander 35mm f2.5 color skopar
Film: Ilford XP2
Scanner: Fuji SP-2000

I think I shot it around wide open, dont exactly remember, somewhere around there.
 
I've always wondered about this. Glad to see everyone's opinions and experiences on the topic. So far it seems like most everyone is sticking to shooting b/w.
 
monitors and scanners suck :) I agree with nh3.

when I made a print (my first before I used to scan under a few years) and I was blown away how rich greys has it. Sharpness is visible at better way. Scanner CCD smedges it out. It is hard to fix on crap monitor which shows not much tones as paper :)
 
Ralph Gibson scans wet prints. It is best way IMHO. for preview scans from negatives work fine and it is cheaper way to avoid contact print.
 
Nh3 said:
Look people, this is just a post if you don't agree with it thats fine, otherwise please don't start a flame war and relive your passive aggressive tendencies.
Click to expand...

Ah, so it's OK for you to state an opinion but not OK for us to state ours? Then it's a "flame war"? So far I haven't seen any flaming here, just some matter-of-fact remarks on why people do not agree with you.

By the way, I don't either. First, I still like to do analog enlargements when I get the chance (no spare room in my apartment). But second (and this is your point), even if all I did want to do is scan the negatives, color film would not do for me.

I've had the same idea a couple years back, and it's not the same. For one thing (and I'm wondering why no one has picked this up): the dynamic range of color negative film, while above slides or digital, is still not quite up there with B/W. And that's what counts with me.
 
Nh3 said:
Ok boss, I will do what you say. Is there anything else I should be aware of?

...

Look people, this is just a post if you don't agree with it thats fine, otherwise please don't start a flame war and relive your passive aggressive tendencies.

cheers,
Click to expand...
You could try growing up a bit too.
No offense but you remind me of a friend who tried drugs WAY later in life than the rest of us. When he got high he kept trying to explain his experience like we had never been through it before. "You don't understand man! The things I'm seeing - you don't understand!"
But actually we all did. And we were bored.
 
Well, admit that "B&W film is obselte if you're going to scan the negatives" was pretty strong statement, just asking for similarly strong replies. A lot of people here been there, done that and got the T-shirt. So, unsurprisingly, responses vary from polite chuckle to mild irritation.

I see you still on the quest of experimenting with conversions to BW. Great, that's how experience is born. And yeah, C41 is a better start for conversion from color than digital, if only for latitude. Still it hardly replicates the classic BW tones, unless you really put a lot of effort into each image. Which brings us to the point of "why", since it combines all inconveniences of film with disadvantages of digital. And a 100" (18 x 36exp) of Tri-X can be freely bought for $40 or so.
 
Perhaps I should have a put a question mark in the end of the title. But then I always expect better of people and think that they will get passed the title and read the message but once again humanity disappoints me. :)


Anyway, wet printing is the only way to go for b&w film and then scanning the prints.

C41 is the tested and tried method and I think most scanners are designed as such to make the best of C41 negatives. I also checked and it appears that C41 negatives are 'thinner' and perhaps that helps to transfer more detail, i hope someone more knowledgeable confirms this.
 
-Sometimes- it's just as good. And there are certainly talented people that have a great eye and can turn a compelling color photo into a compelling black and white photo.

But sometimes black and white captures a certain magic that color film would not. Go to a museum, look carefully.
 
Last edited:
J J Kapsberger said:
Sorry for the hijack, but how do you get running water in the bedroom?
Click to expand...

hehe, glad you asked! I didnt. There is a desk in there that has the enlarger on it, then just the frame of a bed with a a board over it and my pans on there. I mix my chemicals and dump them into the pans, first developer, second water stop bath, third fixer, then take the print out into the bathroom all the while dripping fixer all over the floor (thank goodness its a mock stone floor) where in the bathtub has a pan sitting on top of a upside down bucket which is angled so it drips water from one corner and whala, angry girlfriend.
 
I'll join the choir for B&W film.
I've shot many rolls of kodak 400UC, scanned and converted. I've been very happy with the results. Even so, they're not as pleasing as the results I get from black and white film.
Besides which, quality control at the lab is not as good as mine at home. My self-developed negatives are far less likely to be all scratched up.
 
Nh3 said:
C41 is the tested and tried method and I think most scanners are designed as such to make the best of C41 negatives
Click to expand...

My Nikon Coolscan V ED has trouble with colour C41 negatives. The scans always show noise and chrome is poorly reproduced. The Coolscan handles slide film the best, BW negs second and C41 colour negs a distant third. In fact, the low res lab scans I bring home with the negs usually look better than what I get using my Coolscan (way less noise, way better chrome). I think the thick C41 colour film scatters the Coolscan's light.
 
I think it would be great if someone were to scan both the negative and the print (wet printed) of a negative and compare them.
 
Pitxu said:
That's exactly my experience with my Epson, I've even been thinking about shooting slides for everything.
Click to expand...
Richard,

Do you think such issues have anything to do with the software being used to scan?
I'm curious as I have a Coolscan 5000 and am using VueScan.

I have yet to really look at the C-41 colour negs but B&W and E6 seems to be fine on mine.

Curious,
Dave
 
Nh3 said:
Perhaps I should have a put a question mark in the end of the title. But then I always expect better of people and think that they will get passed the title and read the message but once again humanity disappoints me. :)
Click to expand...

You're really in it for the beating, aren't you? After first putting out a post that I found only mildly naive, then bashing people for their (as I find) very open-minded answers, you now have to go and outright insult me...

Sorry for the OT, I'll refrain from any further discussion here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom