JPSuisse
Well-known
Hi all
So, today is going to be my first try at developing my own B/W film. And of course, I'll scan it on my Nikon 5000 afterwards.
And now, I have a question. I am trying to think of the whole process holistically now. What is the best technique for shooting and developing B/W film for scanning:
a.) Slightly under expose photos, because this will keep the negatives on the lighter side. Do this, because dark areas are generally the areas where a scanner will read noise.
b.) Try to expose normally, shoot with a filter where possible to spread the histogram of the scanned image out a little.
And, then what strategy should be used when developing for these shooting techniques?
Or, does anybody else have any better advice. Comments of some people like Chris Crawford would be appreciated. I always like the look of his scans, for instance.
Kind regards,
JP
So, today is going to be my first try at developing my own B/W film. And of course, I'll scan it on my Nikon 5000 afterwards.
And now, I have a question. I am trying to think of the whole process holistically now. What is the best technique for shooting and developing B/W film for scanning:
a.) Slightly under expose photos, because this will keep the negatives on the lighter side. Do this, because dark areas are generally the areas where a scanner will read noise.
b.) Try to expose normally, shoot with a filter where possible to spread the histogram of the scanned image out a little.
And, then what strategy should be used when developing for these shooting techniques?
Or, does anybody else have any better advice. Comments of some people like Chris Crawford would be appreciated. I always like the look of his scans, for instance.
Kind regards,
JP
Austerby
Well-known
there's some helpful advice in this blog - http://photo-utopia.blogspot.com/ though you'll need to search in the archives for it.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
IMHO by far the best stuff for scanning is good 'ole Ilford XP2 !....unless of course, you really like grain!
Dave.
Dave.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
I develop and expose the same as I did for darkroom printing on a diffusion light source enlarger. It works for me, don't know if there's a better way. If I ever do decide to wet print again (unlikely, but who knows..I am still young), my negs wil be printable easily.
ChrisN
Striving
I aim for a relatively flat negative (reduced contrast) yet with adequate detail in the shadows. Often this requires 1 stop over-exposure and reduced time in the developer to prevent the highlights blowing out.
mfogiel
Veteran
If you like good acutance and tonality, the pyro type developers are very well suited for scanning, for 3 reasons:
- high acutance lets you avoid doing the sharpening in PS, which can easily exaggerate the grain
- a highly compensating developing action makes sure you do not get overly dense negs
- the stain present with some films, if you scan in RGB and convert to B&W masks further the grain appearance
Personally, I use Prescysol EF (apparently same as Pyrocat HD) with most films. (Shoot Tri-X at EI 250 for a great tonality). Another acutance developer with medium contrast which works well with slower films is FX39, in particular with Fomapan 200 (EI 125). Rodinal at higher dilutions is also nice, but it can block the highlights at times, or in the stand process cause some uneven development.
- high acutance lets you avoid doing the sharpening in PS, which can easily exaggerate the grain
- a highly compensating developing action makes sure you do not get overly dense negs
- the stain present with some films, if you scan in RGB and convert to B&W masks further the grain appearance
Personally, I use Prescysol EF (apparently same as Pyrocat HD) with most films. (Shoot Tri-X at EI 250 for a great tonality). Another acutance developer with medium contrast which works well with slower films is FX39, in particular with Fomapan 200 (EI 125). Rodinal at higher dilutions is also nice, but it can block the highlights at times, or in the stand process cause some uneven development.
jky
Well-known
I shoot as I normally do & develop a flat neg.
presspass
filmshooter
Try one of the divided developers in the Darkroom Cookbook. They produce fine grain, low contrast, and are dirt simple to use - time and temperature are not an issue. I've been using the divided D23 for several months and like the results better than staining developers. They scan well and print well in the wet darkroom
JPSuisse
Well-known
Thanks Mfogiel! This is exactly the kind of tip I was looking for.
As to the other post from somebody, I'm not sure I know yet what a divided devloper is...
Cheers, JP
As to the other post from somebody, I'm not sure I know yet what a divided devloper is...
Cheers, JP
JPSuisse
Well-known
So, it's me again with more comments about developing and scanning:
1.) It really appears to me that the best and easiest scanning results will be achieved with a developing process specially done for scanning. The developing services are probably just going to give me a fairly low contrast bland negative.
2.) I'm going to try mfogiel's suggestion of using Prescysol EF and Tri-X, except that I will shoot at box speed. The idea of above average accutancy sounds like it might be good. And less work on the computer is always desireable!
3.) Several people indicated that a flat negative is better for scanning? Why?? This is the last point I don't understand. Since I'm using a film scanner (Nikon 5000) with good dynamic range, shouldn't I try to get negatives with above average contrast (i.e. not flat?) Does it have anything to do with noise in dark areas of the scans (i.e. in the highlights of the inverted image)?
4.) Since I'm scanning with VueScan I have the ability to turn off all autolevels. So, I should be able to make a farily punchy negative and still make a good scan. I should be able to get the best from an optimal negative and then adjust in Lightroom.
So, I guess it's up to me to post results soon. I'll be in Rome in a week with a bunch of Tri-X... Let's see what happens. First I have to buy the materials for developing though!!
Cheers all, JP
1.) It really appears to me that the best and easiest scanning results will be achieved with a developing process specially done for scanning. The developing services are probably just going to give me a fairly low contrast bland negative.
2.) I'm going to try mfogiel's suggestion of using Prescysol EF and Tri-X, except that I will shoot at box speed. The idea of above average accutancy sounds like it might be good. And less work on the computer is always desireable!
3.) Several people indicated that a flat negative is better for scanning? Why?? This is the last point I don't understand. Since I'm using a film scanner (Nikon 5000) with good dynamic range, shouldn't I try to get negatives with above average contrast (i.e. not flat?) Does it have anything to do with noise in dark areas of the scans (i.e. in the highlights of the inverted image)?
4.) Since I'm scanning with VueScan I have the ability to turn off all autolevels. So, I should be able to make a farily punchy negative and still make a good scan. I should be able to get the best from an optimal negative and then adjust in Lightroom.
So, I guess it's up to me to post results soon. I'll be in Rome in a week with a bunch of Tri-X... Let's see what happens. First I have to buy the materials for developing though!!
Cheers all, JP
JPSuisse
Well-known
PS. - good thing I got my Nikon 5000 a year ago, now that it's been discontinued and all... :-( What a blow to the film community...