Digital BW, The Print

I do use PortraBW and I love it, too. By the way, I have the same scanner
(Canon FS4000) and find that, beside ICE (or FARE, as Canon names its own)
capability, chromogenic film has way less grain than traditional BW films of
corresponding speed. This is particularly important when scanning, because
grain, which may have nothing bad itself, is the limiting factor when you
come to sharpening.
I can't find a way (and, believe me, I tried each and every sharpening
methods discussed on list and elsewhere) to effectively sharpen a scan of a
35mm T-Max 400: by "effectively" I mean that the *printed* image gets better
(i.e. sharpened, but with no artifacts). OTOH, I can do it with Portra400...
You may be able to avoid artifacts with slower films (TMax100, PanF 50, and
so on), but you lose speed...
Just my 0.02 euros...
 
Alessandro Pardi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One day I'll have a website.
Until then, you can see some of my work here:

 <http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=189247>
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=189247
------------------------------------------------------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: charles_bandes [mailto:byronbulb@...]
Sent: giovedì 16 maggio 2002 07.43
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B&W Films and Scanning


I use the Kodak Portra BW - it's a chromogenic BW film. I love it.

(Mostly because I'm lazy and I hate doing my own film development -
years of being a color shooter spoiled me.)

The only advantage I see to the chromogenic stuff other than ease of
processing is that if you have a scanner with digital ICE or an
equivalent (I think canon calls theirs FARE) then you can enable
dust/scratch removal - this won't work with "real" BW film, only
color/chromogenic films.

If you don't care about that, I don't see any reason not to use
traditional film.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "smichener" <smichener@y...>
wrote:
> Hello all,
>     Does anyone have experiences good or bad with particular black 
> and white films.  I shoot 35mm and have been using Kodak's C-41 
> chromogenic BW film and my Canon 4000 dpi scanner.  I recently 
> purchased tanks, chemistry and equipment to begin developing true BW 
> film (Kodak or Ilford).  I was hoping to improve the contrast and 
> quality of my images.  Of course, after my purchase, I have now read 
> that the C-41 BW film perhaps scans better than true BW film.  Any 
> advice would be appreciated as I have not used any of my new 
> equipment or many rolls of film.  Thank you in advance.
>                                 Scott Michener



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	

ADVERTISEMENT
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=17050191
82:HM/A=979988/R=0/*http://www.fastweb.com/ib/yahoo-79f> 	
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupmai
l/S=1705019182:HM/A=979988/rand=917717828> 	

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint> 

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
"flames."
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service. 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]