Terao
Kiloran
I see a lot of talk about this in order to improve scanning of negs. Is it just that it reduces the dynamic range of the neg allowing you to capture more detail and then post-process to the look you want? If you use a low contrast developer is that going to make the neg useless for traditional wet printing? I have a dedicated film scanner (Nikon Super Coolscan 400ED) - is that also going to benefit from being fed low contrast negs?
markinlondon
Elmar user
Yes, excess (as far as the scanner's concerned) contrast will push the dynamic range of the scanner. In practice I've found you should use about the same compensation you would use for printing with a condenser enlarger i.e reduce manufacturer's stated times by ~20%. Most published times seem to be for printing with a diffusion head. When I used a condenser I took Ilford's 24C times but processed at 20C. This produced negatives that not only printed well on a condenser but also scanned easily on my elderly Canon 2710.
Ronald M
Veteran
Negs that print on my condenser enlarger with #2 paper scan perfectly with my Minolta 5400 without using and of the contrast or curve compensation built into the scanner program. Same with 4x5 and Epson 4870.
phototone
Well-known
I think using a Pyro based developer such as the Wimberly wd2d, or PMK pyro, is a good solution to getting negatives that print or scan well. It is very hard to block a highlight with a Pyro developer.
Tin
Well-known
But here comes my problem. I would like to print some of my negatives, but also would like to scan others probably on the same roll. But I have a diffuser enlarger. Is there a good compromise solution other than getting a condenser enlarger?
Tin
Tin
DavidH
Overweight and over here
Terao said:
I've read of this in several places...but have never had any problems with my KM5400 scanning any negs over the last couple of years...so I can't say I bother trying to dev for low contrast. Don't know the Nikon though...
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Sure there is a compromise. Use a #3 filter instead of a #2. There you go.
allan
allan
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
phototone said:
Then any compensating or two-part developer would be what you'd want, since that is one of the purposes of compensating developers.
Not to get too OT here, but knowing some here use PMK (I had plns to test it myself) I had read (on Pnet I think) that the benefits of a PMK Pyro or staining developers didn't translate to the scanner (as opposed to the enlarger)--the benefits being subtle/better highlight detail. Does anyone know if this is the case?
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Ray,
I've heard that the highlight/contrast control crosses over just fine. The pryo developers are just far more compensating then many others.
However, what I'm pretty sure is lost is the decrease in grain from the staining.
Of course, I haven't tried it yet, either.
allan
I've heard that the highlight/contrast control crosses over just fine. The pryo developers are just far more compensating then many others.
However, what I'm pretty sure is lost is the decrease in grain from the staining.
Of course, I haven't tried it yet, either.
allan