Digital BW, The Print

I have been trying to follow this group for a few months now.  I do 
not possess the technical knowledge that most of you do.  I have been 
trying to get my 1160 with variable tone MIS inks up and running.  I 
have been moderately successful when using either color slide or 
color neg. films.  I have NOT been so with B&W.  This has been a 
frustrating thing.  My Minolta multi-pro scanner does not give me 
good scans from B&W.  The histogram is always 'pushed over' to the 
left (appears dark with 'blown-out' highlights).  Today I went over 
to a friend's and he scanned my B&W slide on an older AGFA ( model 
HID)  which looks like a flat bed but isn't and scans either 
documents or film up to 8x10.  And lo and behold a far superior scan! 
The histogram was nice and 'spread out' and the shadow's all had good 
detail.
I have gathered by now that scanning silver halide films is not easy. 
I wonder, as a 'dumb newbie' to the field if someone would step up 
and tell me the short answers to the following questions:
1)Which (not too expensive) scanner is best for black and white?
2)Is there any LOSS of Quality using a color slide (or neg) and 
converting to monochrome (I usually do this in channel mixer after 
obtaining what looks like the right filtration). Is this 'cheating' 
in any way?
I'm sure these are old questions and that those among you who are the 
most expert will find them boring.
Thanks,
ML
--

So I can't tell you too much about which scanner to get or anything
like that. I have pretty good luck with a Canon 2710 filmscanner -
they're mighty cheap these days, so that might be an option for you.
My other scanner is a Canon 2400UF flatbed - it does _not_ do so well
for BW. We have an Epson 2450 at the school I teach at, it seems to do
pretty well with BW and color, but not as well as a dedicated filmscanner.

As for "cheating" - it's the image and the print that matters, not the
steps that get you there. If you can make the best image by shooting
velvia and converting to bw, do it! :)

I do think that "real" bw films have more detail and better grain than
color stuff, but that's just my opinion.

> I have gathered by now that scanning silver halide films is not 
easy. 
> I wonder, as a 'dumb newbie' to the field if someone would 
step up 
> and tell me the short answers to the following questions:
> 1)Which (not too expensive) scanner is best for black and 
white?

I've been using a Nikon 8000 and have been very happy with the 
quality of the scans for silver films as well as dye films, slide, 
and negative. I am also amazed with the grain removal software 
that comes with the scanner (part of the ICE cubed package). It 
works wonders with color negative film, though it is time 
consuming.


> 2)Is there any LOSS of Quality using a color slide (or neg) and 
> converting to monochrome (I usually do this in channel mixer 
after 
> obtaining what looks like the right filtration). Is this 'cheating' 
> in any way?

Cheating? Never.  I think it has a little different look than 
traditional b&w films but if you get the image that you want, 
terrific.


> I'm sure these are old questions and that those among you 
who are the 
> most expert will find them boring.
> Thanks,
> ML
> --


I wasn't too bored. hope I helped.
-bruce

You might want to visit Tony Sleep's web site

http://www.halftone.co.uk/

Marcel and consider asking your questions on his filmscanner list too.

My technical socks aren't very high either, and I don't use B&W film, 
but I print B&W on one of my 1160s, in which I use MIS VM 
Sepia-Neutral.

I use color negative/print film because I heard on these lists that 
not-too-expensive 35mm scanners do a better job of scanning it than 
slides. My impression is that there's probably more to be gained from 
worrying about which film to use and how to use it than there is to 
be gained from worrying about which of the not-too-expensive scanners 
to use.

There is however a lot of compare-and-contrast posting on the 
filmscanner list. I don't think Minolta (or Canon) has done as well 
as Nikon and Polaroid have in those comparisons. But I also don't 
think that's had anything much to do with scanning B&W film.

Incidentally, the comparison of negative/print films most recently 
posted on the filmscanner list rated Fuji Superia best and Kodak 
Supra second (at ASA 100). But it wasn't a close second. And 
incidental to those posts, it was said that Kodak was merging Supra 
100 and Royal Gold 100 into one 200 ASA film already being sold in 
England. So when I use my Supra 100 up, I think I'll try Superia 100 
in my Polaroid SprintScan 4000 (not Plus). In it I've used 
Lasersoft's Silverfast scanning software through two or three 
upgrades now. Silverfast seems to me to have improved, but its 
documentation still frustrates me.

Your in-Photoshop conversion to grayscale seems to me more 
sophisticated and controlled (by you) than any not-too-expensive 
scanner would do for you. And nothing in such a workflow seems to me 
to be "cheating".

Good luck and happy holidays.

Sam

Sam McCandless                 samcc@...

>I have been trying to follow this group for a few months now.  I do
>not possess the technical knowledge that most of you do.  I have been
>trying to get my 1160 with variable tone MIS inks up and running.  I
>have been moderately successful when using either color slide or
>color neg. films.  I have NOT been so with B&W.  This has been a
>frustrating thing.  My Minolta multi-pro scanner does not give me
>good scans from B&W.  The histogram is always 'pushed over' to the
>left (appears dark with 'blown-out' highlights).  Today I went over
>to a friend's and he scanned my B&W slide on an older AGFA ( model
>HID)  which looks like a flat bed but isn't and scans either
>documents or film up to 8x10.  And lo and behold a far superior scan!
>The histogram was nice and 'spread out' and the shadow's all had good
>detail.
>I have gathered by now that scanning silver halide films is not easy.
>I wonder, as a 'dumb newbie' to the field if someone would step up
>and tell me the short answers to the following questions:
>1)Which (not too expensive) scanner is best for black and white?
>2)Is there any LOSS of Quality using a color slide (or neg) and
>converting to monochrome (I usually do this in channel mixer after
>obtaining what looks like the right filtration). Is this 'cheating'
>in any way?
>I'm sure these are old questions and that those among you who are the
>most expert will find them boring.
>Thanks,
>ML
>--

Hi ML;
Perhaps I can help a bit- I do a lot of B&W scanning on a Nikon 
8000ED which is probably a better scanner, but unfortunately not as 
good as the price/specs would indicate. I get similar results if I 
let the scanner software do the inversion from neg to pos. I get 
better results if I scan a neg as a positive image and output it to 
Photoshop in 16 bit, then invert. The data is still 'bunched up'(but 
you get all of it) but that has to do with B&W negs not having the 
density range to use the entire dynamic range of most scanners. A 
couple of histogram and curve adjustments still in 16-bit will get 
you a decent tonal range while preserving shadow and highlight 
detail.
> 
  My Minolta multi-pro scanner does not give me
> >good scans from B&W.  The histogram is always 'pushed over' to the
> >left (appears dark with 'blown-out' highlights).  Today I went 
over
> >to a friend's and he scanned my B&W slide on an older AGFA ( model
> >HID)  which looks like a flat bed but isn't and scans either
> >documents or film up to 8x10.  And lo and behold a far superior 
scan!
> >The histogram was nice and 'spread out' and the shadow's all had 
good
> >detail.
> >I have gathered by now that scanning silver halide films is not 
easy.
> >I wonder, as a 'dumb newbie' to the field if someone would step up
> >and tell me the short answers to the following questions:
> >1)Which (not too expensive) scanner is best for black and white?
> >2)Is there any LOSS of Quality using a color slide (or neg) and
> >converting to monochrome (I usually do this in channel mixer after
> >obtaining what looks like the right filtration). Is 
this 'cheating'
> >in any way?

Sometimes scanning a color neg film will produce more 'grain' 
(actually noise) particularly in the blue channel, than slide film, 
but slide film is so much more contrasty that it takes a better 
scanner to extract clean, noise-free shadows. I've found it very 
helpfull when scanning color negs to use the multi-pass scanning 
that some software allows, (Silverfast for one) it reduces the noise 
considerably, though of course the scan takes longer. And as for 
cheating,who cares? You get the best quality you can any damn way 
you can!

Hope this helps

Steve Karafyllakis

http://www.stevekphoto.com