Digital BW, The Print

Hi Paul,

> > I pretty much end up using 35mm for snapshots ...
>
> Another concur.  In fact, I've moved to the MF rangefinders --
> Fuji 645 Zi &
> Bronica RF 645

I had a Fuji GA645, but found the slow lenses and autofocus weren't to my
liking...  I do have a GS645 folder though, that I like a lot ;-)  Tell me
more about the Bronica if you would.

> -- and find them to be good compromises that can also do
> snapshots.  For family affairs/travel, the Fuji Zi with T400CN
> film in it is
> an amazingly flexible, easy way to go.

I agree!  It was hoping for better with the GA645, perhaps the Zi is much
better...but still that slow lense always gets me...

> But, to get to my question -- I suspect that the old "rules of thumb" that
> I/we used in the darkroom with respect to B&W film may no longer apply to
> film that is shot for scanning.  With modern scanners that are designed --
> perhaps primarily -- to be able to capture the wide density range of slide
> film, I would think a low contrast B&W negative might be wasting the
> scanner's capabilities.

Well, not so for me.  I use a Leafscan, which scans B&W using a neutral
density filter...and I get amazing tonality, far and above what I got using
my Polaroid SS4k...which, as you know, scans in RGB and converts.  I tried
doing the conversion my self in PS, but still, nothing I've seen gives
better B&W scans than the Leaf.

I used to develop %30 for cold light printing.  I have really settled on
just standard development for scanning...and shooting at standard ASA...but
I may change that if I get more time to experiment.  I'm quite happy with
what I get right now...but I'm still dialing things in.

I do develop in D-76 1:1 to limit grain, and it works great.  Very smooth
tonality, and very low grain.

> The results are a characteristic curve with at least 12 stops of useable
> image range (all that I've tested).

Where on earth were you during the big "number of stops you can record on
B&W film" debate?

> I'd be curious if there are any generalities about how to squeeze the best
> performance out of these CCD scanners, or whether they are too
> different to
> generalize.

Get a Leaf ;-)

> So, is there a general "sweet spot" compromise with these scanners that
> you've been able to ascertain?

Not with the Leaf.

> What B&W film/contrast have you found optimizes the quality of your scans?

I'm still experimenting with that.  I get great scans from my overdeveloped
%30 film from years ago...and there's no blockage that I can see!  I think
with the Jobo, which I didn't use before, I may be getting the %30 just
because of the constant agitation the Jobo does...so even though I don't
increase my development times, I like a little darker negative for scanning.
After all, the lamp source for the Leaf is a cold light...

I find Plus-X and Delta-100 give me the best range of tonality for my type
of work, again, developed in D-76 1:1.  Tri-X for mid-light applications,
shot at 200/400 and 800...and Delta 3200 shot at 1600 for low-light
applications, but I'm still working on development etc. with that film.

Regards,

Austin