Digital BW, The Print

Roger,

I use both super XP2 and Ilford fp 4&5. I really like XP2, especially 
shot at 320 rather than 400.  While there are others who are better 
at the technical details, I find XP provides a very nice tonal scale 
with a "creamy" feeling that I cannot be more specific about.  While 
I do not think it is quite as sharp as the standard Ilford films, it 
does well enough in that regard and the flexibility is wonderful. (I 
suspect that the standard films also provide more shadow detail, but 
I am not 100% sure about that.) I tend to shoot  a lot with older 
cameras and it is nice not to have to worry about metering dead on 
for every shot. From what I understand, XP2 is a marked improvement 
over XP1.  I scan it with a Nikon LS-200 with few problems using the 
color setting and converting to B&W in PS.

One other advantage is that if you are traveling it is easy to get it 
processed and you do not have to deal with multiple X-Ray scans at 
airports.  

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Sopher 
<rlsopher@c...>" <rlsopher@c...> wrote:
> I have used XP1 in the past (when I still had a darkroom) and 
wasn't 
> overly impressed compared to what I could do with large & medium 
> format Tri-X but that was some years ago. I didn't really expect 
> 35mm to compete strongly with 4x5 and 6x9. Maybe that was just a 
> self-fulfilling prophesy...
> 
> There is little chance I will ever set up a darkroom again and I 
> have sold off my large and medium format gear so I am interested in 
> what opinions are concerning the chromogenics, particularly Portra 
> and T400CN. My intent would be to scan them to a digital image with 
> my 4000ED. I have been using Fuji color print film for this purpose 
> with no particular unhappiness but I wonder if the B&W C41 films 
> might produce a bit better image for scanning. I can certainly do 
> the experiment myself but I am just as lazy as the next fellow...
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Roger