Natrual B&W vs Converted C41

[helvetica]

The goal in question is to have a black and white inkjet print, from a scanned film image. The photos would be made in normal daylight situations at reasonable film speeds. If I wanted a gritty, pushed Tri-X look, I'd shoot pushed Tri-X. Assuming that as many variables are as similar as possible, what tangible differences are there between silver based B&W vs a converted color negative?

Assumptions:

• same film format: 135
• same ISO rating
• B&W normal processing - D76 or equiv.

Obviously you could write volumes of books - and people have - about all of the variations and customizations you can do with a black and white negative, whereas C41 is pretty much follow the directions on the box. I am not asking about those situations. If I wanted a shot that was especially suitable for stand developing, then it would obviously best be shot with traditional B&W.

I also mentioned 135 format as the grain patters will be much more prominent here than in say 4x5.

 

[whitecat]

I have done so many variations for this. My favorite is BW scanned as a grey or C41 scanned as a BW also. I might suggest you also try C41 BW film. The Ilford shines in a scan.

 

[helvetica]

]I might suggest you also try C41 BW film.

Exactly! I don't shoot the stock anymore, but I have some images made on Kodak BW400CN that I cannot re-shoot with a proper B&W stock. My original question was for situations where I want the option of color, but might want to print B&W.

 

[Photo_Smith]

C41 colour or B&W will look smoother as it has dye clouds rather than gritty silver deposits.
To my eye 400ISO B&W C41 looks more like a fine grained film without the acutance and has less 'graininess' than 400ISO conventional mono.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Converting a scanned color film image to black and white presents the same issues and pitfalls that we have with converting color digital camera images to BW does.

If you scan the image and convert it to BW, it will have a very flat and lifeless appearance. Even if you increase contrast using curves or levels, you'll find you will lose detail in the highlight and shadow tones when you push contrast enough, but the midtones will still look flat. I've gotten excellent results using Black and White plugins for Photoshop, like Topaz BW effects 2 or DxO Filmpack. These increase midtone contrast without blowing out the light and dark tones.

Here's an example, from scanned Fuji NPS 160 color neg film in 120 size:

 

[helvetica]

Thanks Chris, that is a good point. The advantage of a full color image is that you could also selectively filter or recreate any kind of color filter - orange, red, or green. In my digital to b&w conversion experience, however, this can lead to "crunchy" areas if done too much.

 

[thompsonks]

Converting color (Portra) is a tradeoff that I don't mind making: Yes, you can use the PS sliders, but no, you can't have BW film resolution.

 

[mfogiel]

The answer is:
If you are interested in shooting at normal speeds, then a film like XP2 or converted colour C41 will look like this, when everything is perfect:


J.G. by mfogiel, on Flickr

This was XP2 shot at EI 200.
What happens with C41 films, is that the highlights are well preserved and almost never blown out, the grain is invisible in the well exposed areas, and the sharpness is good, but the microcontrast is lacking, which is great for portraiture. Midtones are quite a bit compressed, and the shadows fall apart in a desperate manner. If you do not expose abundantly enough, shadows are pitch black with golf ball size grain. I have been going through my old negatives these days, and I just could not believe I lost all this time mucking about with C41 B&W, while silver films were easily available.
One other good aspect of C41 if you scan, is that you can use ICE.

On the other hand, a well exposed silver film in one of the classic developers, like D76 , Rodinal or HC 110 will give you the entire range of tones, with gradation that is reasonably continuous from the highlights to at least mid shadows. You have to control the highlights and overall contrast through development time and agitation. The results are well worth it.


201213007 by mfogiel, on Flickr

 

[Jonik]

Rollei retro 80s (not the best example since it's exp latitude is ..not great.. but i think it shows why BW films are a better option (for dedicated BW, at least, than any converted color)

and ektar 100

biggest and really huge difference is the exp latitude difference between BW and color film and the feel is different as well