Digital BW, The Print

Eric Neilsen wrote:

> Paul, I don't think that scanning B&W film is a very good way to get "that
> B&W grain look" as the scanning process nearly made me lose my lunch the
> first few years I had a scan made of B&W films.

How are you scanning B&W?  My experience is different.  I found
that, once I started scanning at a reasonable resolution (4000 dpi
in a Nikon LS9000), I'm quite happy with the results with a broad
range of film but it pays to optimize a bit, really not that different
than optimizing for condensor vs. diffusion enlarger.

Scanners will favor a somewhat thinner neg in my experience; about
a one-stop pull is good, and this also reduces the impact of the
real problem, which is Callier effect (dense, grainy negs are the
worst for that).

 > It is just not the same
> thing. If scanners could reproduce the grain of B&W they could get rid of
> dust too,

I don't follow this at all - that doesn't seem to make sense.

> but the way the light get turned into pixels, just leaves this
> darkroom printer cold.

I'm sure it's a matter of personal taste as well, but I've seen
far too many outstanding prints made from scanned B&W negs to indict
the process in general.  Like any process, there's a learning curve
that rewards the diligent.

Dana