Digital BW, The Print

> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Reply-To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Date: 5 Dec 2002 18:43:01 -0000
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Digest Number 1167
> 
>> Isn't point is that shooting in digital color and converting using the
>> plug-ins, channel mixer, etc, gives tremendous control over the output and
>> major advantages over b/w film?
> 
> Andy,
> 
> I don't understand.  What control (or anything for that matter) is lacking
> in scanning B&W films as grayscale if your ultimate goal is grayscale?
> 
> Austin


Austin:

Sorry.  None.  My point was that if the ultimate goal is greyscale, I would
shoot in color, either digital or analog, and convert using the various
channel mixers, selection tools, layers and masks in Photoshop.

I didn't see much compelling evidence either way in the two pics that you
posted as far as the scanning in greyscale or RGB goes.

I am sure the numbers are all different, but I go with my eyes.

Andy

Hi Andy,

> My point was that if the ultimate goal is
> greyscale, I would
> shoot in color, either digital or analog, and convert using the various
> channel mixers, selection tools, layers and masks in Photoshop.

Do you believe there is any downside to that?  (I know what my answer is ;-)

> I didn't see much compelling evidence either way in the two pics that you
> posted as far as the scanning in greyscale or RGB goes.

That is a completely different issue.  That was scanning a B&W negative in
grayscale vs scanning it in RGB.  Again, completely different issue than you
discuss above.

> I am sure the numbers are all different, but I go with my eyes.

And I can see a HUGE difference.  You can't base your conclusion on a 100PPI
web based image.  The sharpness of the grayscale scan is FAR above that of
the RGB scan, and that makes perfect sense.

Regards,

Austin