Digital BW, The Print

Thanks, Tyler, for the quick response.

I can only choose RGB or grayscale, not individual channels.  And yes, I
stay with 16 bit throughout, until I print.  I¹ll continue to fool with it.


Harry



On 4/21/07 3:15 PM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> , "hlockwood"
> <hlockwood@...> wrote:
> ...
>> > I'm shooting a couple of test rolls of XP2 Super...
> 
> I use that film regularly for medium format and have for many years,
> it scans well. With large prints, people are amazed to learn it's not 4x5.
> 
>> > 
>> > Rather than scan as grayscale, I scanned (Nikon 4000ED) in RGB, then
> converted to Lab 
>> > and discarded the color channels.  I did this to get rid of any
> effects of the background
>> > mask.
> 
> I'm not sure this procedure is giving you any advantage when it comes
> to the mask. It contains a limited amount of color, so really you're
> just going to have to remove it's density with an end point adjustment
> at some point along the way, whether in the scanner software, or
> Photoshop, intentionally or due some some unseen "auto" function.
> 
> Scanners are native RGB, so even with a grayscale scan it's just
> converting on the fly for you. It's been a long time since I used a
> Nikon, is there a preference setting allowing you to select one of the
> channels for gray, R, G, or B? If so, do an identical test scan of the
> same neg using each color, with no auto adjustments. In PS look at the
> histograms and see which one has filled it out the most, icluding that
> low ened for the base density. Then look at 100%, check noise and
> sharpness.
> If one channel outperforms the others, go with that.
> 
>> >  This resulted in an image that required gentler tonal corrections
> than if I had 
>> > scanned in grayscale.
> 
> That may very well be. And if no other method shows any improvement,
> you might as well stay with it.
> 
> ...
>> > So, have I stumbled onto a well-known procedure, or does it make
> little or no difference
>> > which route one takes in the scanning step.
> 
> It's known, and some recommend it. Anything can make a difference, and
>  these things are well worth exploring. We called it craft in the
> olden days of yore and lore.
> I just try to stay away from a lot of mode conversions, for B&W you'll
> be doing a lot of tonal editing in PS anyway, so combined the loss can
> add up. However you do it, I highly recomend scanning and staying in
> high bit for those steps, and as long as possible down the line when
> working on single channel files.
>> > 
>> > Also, any comments on the relative merits of Ilford vs. Kodak
> chromogenic film would be
>> > welcome.  TIA
> 
> I'd be very interested in anyone's comments about that as well, I've
> yet to test the Kodak.
> 
> Tyler
> 

-- 

Harry F. Lockwood




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