Digital BW, The Print

On 04/19/2013 01:34 AM, jimbo wrote:

> The raw files when shot properly out of current DSLR's are much better
> then most would think when moving film to digital.. It's a tight process
> but the controls available to us now with current software and raw files
> in my opinion offer more flexibility & surpass most of the software were
> used to with our drum scanners.. Anyway, who know's where it'll go but
> I'm honestly embracing it.. ...I'm have been experimenting with 4
> exposures on 6x7's and stitching .. it workaable.. but I'd rather use
> the drum scanner .... I am honestly after a quick quality process for
> 35mm that is my target and I'm serious about it....

> jimbo

Ask Paul here. I think he made the step from 645 to fullframe digital + 
the best lenses around + stitching and stacking methods 2-3 years ago. 
The progress made in full frame DSLRs since must be 1.5x, not just 
resolution but also in noise reduction at higher ISO settings. Getting 
close to 6x7 then.

The main issue with scanned B&W film is that you get two information 
levels and related noise types, the (aliased) grain and the pixels. In 
sharpening, noise reduction, tone control, resampling it makes things 
more difficult than an image build from first generation pixels.

Tim Vitale's PDF on film grain is still good information.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2012: 500+ inkjet media paper white spectral plots.