Digital BW, The Print

If you still want to check out the scanner's channel performance and
possible effects of base color scan RGB and carefully look at each
channel. You can always throw 2 away if one stands out, or even use
the mixer to use 2 if one is a dog.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Harry Lockwood
<hflockwood@...> wrote:
>
> 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]
>