Digital BW, The Print

Hi list,

I just purchased the October issue of Practical Photography (an english
magazine, that I happened to find here in Italy), mainly because of a
special edition about black and white (or "mono", as they call it). What
most interested me was the section where they asked 6 pros what their
favorite film/developer was, and why. This made me reconsider my current
choice: I now shoot Kodak Supra 100 and then manipulate in Photoshop. This
gives me the advantage of the three color channels to pick from, and a
comparison I made with Ilford Pan F, a highly reputed film, as I gather,
showed no lack of resolution or sharpness when scanned with my Nikon LS-30.
Now I'm (eagerly) waiting for a new scanner to be delivered, and I want to
test again, to see if 4000dpi are enough to make differences visible.
So, for those of you who haven't gone full digital (yet), what is your
favorite B&W film/developer, with respect to scanning, and why?

PS - I have a roll of Technical Pan waiting to be developed, so I'd
especially like to know what developers rate best with this film (on the PP
poll the one photographer that used TechPan recommended Agfa Rodinal, to
keep contrast low).

Thanks all in advance,
Alessandro Pardi

Tech Pan has its own developer (and developing instructions)...and it
is advised to use that only...I just can't remember what it's
called?...Technodol(?)...

Cathy



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Alessandro Pardi
<alessandro.pardi@i...> wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> I just purchased the October issue of Practical Photography (an english
> magazine, that I happened to find here in Italy), mainly because of a
> special edition about black and white (or "mono", as they call it). What
> most interested me was the section where they asked 6 pros what their
> favorite film/developer was, and why. This made me reconsider my current
> choice: I now shoot Kodak Supra 100 and then manipulate in
Photoshop. This
> gives me the advantage of the three color channels to pick from, and a
> comparison I made with Ilford Pan F, a highly reputed film, as I gather,
> showed no lack of resolution or sharpness when scanned with my Nikon
LS-30.
> Now I'm (eagerly) waiting for a new scanner to be delivered, and I
want to
> test again, to see if 4000dpi are enough to make differences visible.
> So, for those of you who haven't gone full digital (yet), what is your
> favorite B&W film/developer, with respect to scanning, and why?
> 
> PS - I have a roll of Technical Pan waiting to be developed, so I'd
> especially like to know what developers rate best with this film (on
the PP

> poll the one photographer that used TechPan recommended Agfa Rodinal, to
> keep contrast low).
> 
> Thanks all in advance,
> Alessandro Pardi

> What
> most interested me was the section where they asked 6 pros what their
> favorite film/developer was, and why. This made me reconsider my current
> choice: I now shoot Kodak Supra 100 and then manipulate in Photoshop.

Was there a consensus of opinion among the pros in this article? I doubt
you'll find any consensus here. What was said that has you reconsider what
you are doing?

Todd

There was no consensus, but that wasn't the aim of the article, either (and
definitely not mine, here). The idea was simply to show what pros got from
specific film/developers that best suited their style. It's about the same
"discovery" that Nicholas Hartmann made when he decided to print with black
ink only: it works for gritty, grainy portraits, not for Ansel Adams
landscapes.
What made me reconsider my choice is that I never explored these
possibilities, and it may well be, for example, that Technical Pan has a
better resolution and finer grain than Supra 100 and that this is visible
even when scanned with a prosumer scanner and printed with an Epson 1160. 
 
Alex

 -----Original Message-----
From: Todd Flashner [mailto:tflash@earthlink.net]
Sent: lunedì 22 ottobre 2001 17.33
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Film poll



> What
> most interested me was the section where they asked 6 pros what their
> favorite film/developer was, and why. This made me reconsider my current
> choice: I now shoot Kodak Supra 100 and then manipulate in Photoshop.

Was there a consensus of opinion among the pros in this article? I doubt
you'll find any consensus here. What was said that has you reconsider what
you are doing?

Todd




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

Alessandro,

My personal film and developer choices are Ilford FP4+ and Kodak TMax 400 in
4x5, 120 and 35mm film. In 120 and 35mm I am also starting to consistently
use Ilford SFX.

The FP4+ is my primary 4x5 and 120 film. This works well for my in terms of
grain, resolution and film speed for most of my work which is done on a
tripod. For low light or hand held I switch to TMax400 and also find it
useful for heavy compression of -3 and -4 developments.

The SFX is a good all round film and lets me play with near infrared images.
Very nice grain structure.

I develop my film in a pyro developer of my own devising in a Jobo film
processor. The results with my developer are very similar to what you would
get using Gordon Hutchins PMK pyro developer.

Pyro developers not only produce neutral silver density but also produce a
yellow or yellow/green stain in proportion to the silver density. This gives
you high lights that are much more printable as they are not composed of
opaque particles. The stain has no grain and decreases the graininess of the
image which may or may not be desirable to you. The use of pyro as a
developing agent induces an edge effect increasing the sharpness of the
negative. A sort of chemical unsharp mask effect.

The stain from pyro development then makes RGB scanning a logical choice as
there is meaningfully different information on the three channels.
Especially the B channel. In theory you should be able to work on monochrome
images in RGB and have more digital information to send to the printer.

I tried Technical Pan years ago and while it is very high resolution, I did
not like the tonality of the film at all. Many different developers have
been used with this film. You should check out the Photographers Formulary

http://www.photoformulary.com/

Also if you are interested in very high resolution films the new Gigabit
film looks like it would be worth investigating.

http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/toc.htm

There is an excellent article by Burkhardt Kiegeland in Photovision magazine
July/August 2001. The film is also available from Lotus View Camera:

www.lotusviewcamera.at

A note on using color film for B&W. Color films have three emulsions layered
on top of each other while a B&W film has a single layer. Because of this
B&W films tend to produce sharper, higher resolution negatives.

Martin Wesley




----- Original Message -----
From: "Alessandro Pardi" <alessandro.pardi@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 1:31 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] Film poll


> Hi list,
>
> I just purchased the October issue of Practical Photography (an english
> magazine, that I happened to find here in Italy), mainly because of a
> special edition about black and white (or "mono", as they call it). What
> most interested me was the section where they asked 6 pros what their
> favorite film/developer was, and why. This made me reconsider my current
> choice: I now shoot Kodak Supra 100 and then manipulate in Photoshop. This
> gives me the advantage of the three color channels to pick from, and a
> comparison I made with Ilford Pan F, a highly reputed film, as I gather,
> showed no lack of resolution or sharpness when scanned with my Nikon
LS-30.
> Now I'm (eagerly) waiting for a new scanner to be delivered, and I want to
> test again, to see if 4000dpi are enough to make differences visible.
> So, for those of you who haven't gone full digital (yet), what is your
> favorite B&W film/developer, with respect to scanning, and why?
>
> PS - I have a roll of Technical Pan waiting to be developed, so I'd
> especially like to know what developers rate best with this film (on the
PP
> poll the one photographer that used TechPan recommended Agfa Rodinal, to
> keep contrast low).
>
> Thanks all in advance,
> Alessandro Pardi
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Martin,
 
thank you for your very detailed answer. There's a lot of information and
food for thought, here, especially this pyro developer and Gigabit film I
never heard about. I have finally found a B&W lab I can trust, so I'll ask
them about this.
Just out of curiosity, what is your scanner and how large can you print with
35mm FP4+ and (especially) TMax400? I'm thinking about 13x19, and am afraid
that grain may be an issue with but the slowest film.
About the sharpness of color and B&W film, this is exactly what I expected
to see in my PanF vs. Supra test (I shot exactly the same scene, with a
sharp prime lens), but apparently my 2700dpi scanner isn't enough. Let's
wait for the Canon FS4000 and see...
 
Thanks again,
Alessandro Pardi

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@earthlink.net]
Sent: martedì 23 ottobre 2001 23.02
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Film poll


Alessandro,

My personal film and developer choices are Ilford FP4+ and Kodak TMax 400 in
4x5, 120 and 35mm film. In 120 and 35mm I am also starting to consistently
use Ilford SFX.

The FP4+ is my primary 4x5 and 120 film. This works well for my in terms of
grain, resolution and film speed for most of my work which is done on a
tripod. For low light or hand held I switch to TMax400 and also find it
useful for heavy compression of -3 and -4 developments.

The SFX is a good all round film and lets me play with near infrared images.
Very nice grain structure.

I develop my film in a pyro developer of my own devising in a Jobo film
processor. The results with my developer are very similar to what you would
get using Gordon Hutchins PMK pyro developer.

Pyro developers not only produce neutral silver density but also produce a
yellow or yellow/green stain in proportion to the silver density. This gives
you high lights that are much more printable as they are not composed of
opaque particles. The stain has no grain and decreases the graininess of the
image which may or may not be desirable to you. The use of pyro as a
developing agent induces an edge effect increasing the sharpness of the
negative. A sort of chemical unsharp mask effect.

The stain from pyro development then makes RGB scanning a logical choice as
there is meaningfully different information on the three channels.
Especially the B channel. In theory you should be able to work on monochrome
images in RGB and have more digital information to send to the printer.

I tried Technical Pan years ago and while it is very high resolution, I did
not like the tonality of the film at all. Many different developers have
been used with this film. You should check out the Photographers Formulary

http://www.photoformulary.com/ <http://www.photoformulary.com/> 

Also if you are interested in very high resolution films the new Gigabit
film looks like it would be worth investigating.

http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/toc.htm
<http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/toc.htm> 

There is an excellent article by Burkhardt Kiegeland in Photovision magazine
July/August 2001. The film is also available from Lotus View Camera:

www.lotusviewcamera.at

A note on using color film for B&W. Color films have three emulsions layered
on top of each other while a B&W film has a single layer. Because of this
B&W films tend to produce sharper, higher resolution negatives.

Martin Wesley





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

Martin's Gigabit film link is certainly a curious offering.  Have you
tried the film, Martin?

My experience with film scanning shows an unnoticeable difference
between pyro and traditional film development. My tests were done with
8X10 HP5 and TriX negatives.  I also decided that the silver print
results of Pyro vs. HC110 or TMax developers were not of significance
for my work.  Although I shoot 8X10, I'm not of the "spectacular
landscape" school of photography.  I make pictures of people and
cultures so my tolerances may be wider than the "red filter over the
gathering storm clouds" crowd.  I like great landscapes, I just don't
photograph them.

I shoot HP5 for most everything.  I like that "old school" dark and
grainy look but the newer C-41 b/w films are easier to scan.

Frank

http://www.culturalvisions.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Alessandro Pardi
<alessandro.pardi@i...> wrote:
> Martin,
>  
> thank you for your very detailed answer. There's a lot of
information and
> food for thought, here, especially this pyro developer and Gigabit
film I
> never heard about. I have finally found a B&W lab I can trust, so
I'll ask
> them about this.
> Just out of curiosity, what is your scanner and how large can you
print with
> 35mm FP4+ and (especially) TMax400? I'm thinking about 13x19, and am
afraid
> that grain may be an issue with but the slowest film.
> About the sharpness of color and B&W film, this is exactly what I
expected
> to see in my PanF vs. Supra test (I shot exactly the same scene, with a
> sharp prime lens), but apparently my 2700dpi scanner isn't enough. Let's
> wait for the Canon FS4000 and see...
>  
> Thanks again,
> Alessandro Pardi
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@e...]
> Sent: martedì 23 ottobre 2001 23.02
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Film poll
> 
> 
> Alessandro,
> 
> My personal film and developer choices are Ilford FP4+ and Kodak
TMax 400 in
> 4x5, 120 and 35mm film. In 120 and 35mm I am also starting to
consistently
> use Ilford SFX.
> 
> The FP4+ is my primary 4x5 and 120 film. This works well for my in
terms of
> grain, resolution and film speed for most of my work which is done on a
> tripod. For low light or hand held I switch to TMax400 and also find it
> useful for heavy compression of -3 and -4 developments.
> 
> The SFX is a good all round film and lets me play with near infrared
images.
> Very nice grain structure.
> 
> I develop my film in a pyro developer of my own devising in a Jobo film
> processor. The results with my developer are very similar to what
you would
> get using Gordon Hutchins PMK pyro developer.
> 
> Pyro developers not only produce neutral silver density but also
produce a
> yellow or yellow/green stain in proportion to the silver density.
This gives
> you high lights that are much more printable as they are not composed of
> opaque particles. The stain has no grain and decreases the
graininess of the
> image which may or may not be desirable to you. The use of pyro as a
> developing agent induces an edge effect increasing the sharpness of the
> negative. A sort of chemical unsharp mask effect.
> 
> The stain from pyro development then makes RGB scanning a logical
choice as
> there is meaningfully different information on the three channels.
> Especially the B channel. In theory you should be able to work on
monochrome
> images in RGB and have more digital information to send to the printer.
> 
> I tried Technical Pan years ago and while it is very high
resolution, I did
> not like the tonality of the film at all. Many different developers have
> been used with this film. You should check out the Photographers
Formulary
> 
> http://www.photoformulary.com/ <http://www.photoformulary.com/> 
> 
> Also if you are interested in very high resolution films the new Gigabit
> film looks like it would be worth investigating.
> 
> http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/toc.htm
> <http://www.gigabitfilm.de/html/english/toc.htm> 
> 
> There is an excellent article by Burkhardt Kiegeland in Photovision
magazine
> July/August 2001. The film is also available from Lotus View Camera:
> 
> www.lotusviewcamera.at
> 
> A note on using color film for B&W. Color films have three emulsions
layered
> on top of each other while a B&W film has a single layer. Because of
this

> B&W films tend to produce sharper, higher resolution negatives.
> 
> Martin Wesley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Alessandro,

I am using a Polaroid SprintScan 120 at 4000dpi for my 35mm and 6x7cm 
negatives. For 4x5 I am using a Linoscan 1400 at 1200dpi.

My personal inclination in recent years has been to not print 35mm 
larger than 8x10. Out of curiosity I did print a 35mm Tmax 400 neg on 
13x19 paper and was very surprised and pleased with the results. The 
grain was very nicely rendered and I felt it was better than what I 
would have gotten in the darkroom in terms of sharpness.

I can't give you any good feedback on the FP4+ in 35mm as I have not 
used it enough. The speed is a little too slow for handheld work and 
if I am going to carry a tripod I take the Pentax 67 or the 4x5.

On the slower speed films with the pyro, the grain pattern is not 
readily discernable with the 6x7cm negs in the 4000dpi scan. I don't 
know if this is due more to the scanner resolution not being high 
enough, the grain masking effects of the pyro developer or a 
combination of the two.

I have shot some Supra but have not tried scanning it yet. With all 
the advances in film technology in recent years the sharpness gap 
between B&W and color is probably shrinking and may no longer be as 
critical as it once was.

Martin Wesley


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Alessandro Pardi 
<alessandro.pardi@i...> wrote:
> Martin,
>  
> thank you for your very detailed answer. There's a lot of 
information and
> food for thought, here, especially this pyro developer and Gigabit 
film I
> never heard about. I have finally found a B&W lab I can trust, so 
I'll ask
> them about this.
> Just out of curiosity, what is your scanner and how large can you 
print with
> 35mm FP4+ and (especially) TMax400? I'm thinking about 13x19, and 
am afraid
> that grain may be an issue with but the slowest film.
> About the sharpness of color and B&W film, this is exactly what I 
expected
> to see in my PanF vs. Supra test (I shot exactly the same scene, 
with a
> sharp prime lens), but apparently my 2700dpi scanner isn't enough. 
Let's
> wait for the Canon FS4000 and see...
>  
> Thanks again,
> Alessandro Pardi
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@e...]
> Sent: martedì 23 ottobre 2001 23.02
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Film poll
> 
> 
(snip)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., frank@c... wrote:
> Martin's Gigabit film link is certainly a curious offering.  Have 
you
> tried the film, Martin?

Frank,

No I haven't given it a try. I haven't seen a US source or any 
pricing on it either. It is available through Lotus View Camera in 
Austria but you need to contact them by e-mail. Looks interesting 
though and from the illustrations in the article has much nicer tone 
ramp than technical pan. 

> 
> My experience with film scanning shows an unnoticeable difference
> between pyro and traditional film development. My tests were done 
with
> 8X10 HP5 and TriX negatives.  I also decided that the silver print
> results of Pyro vs. HC110 or TMax developers were not of 
significance
> for my work.  Although I shoot 8X10, I'm not of the "spectacular
> landscape" school of photography.  I make pictures of people and
> cultures so my tolerances may be wider than the "red filter over the
> gathering storm clouds" crowd.  I like great landscapes, I just 
don't
> photograph them.

Almost all my work is outdoors and the pyro has been invaluable to me 
for keeping the highlights open. I always seem to bring home many 
more "minus" development sheets than normal. In 4x5 and smaller the 
HP5 and TriX grain structures never appealed for some reason. 
> 
> I shoot HP5 for most everything.  I like that "old school" dark and
> grainy look but the newer C-41 b/w films are easier to scan.

I have tended toward a grainless or near grainless look myself. The C-
41 process negs are probably easier to scan because they are a 
combination of stain and silver like pyro. <<g>>

Martin

(snip)

Martin Wesley wrote:

"I have shot some Supra but have not tried scanning it yet. With 
all the advances in film technology in recent years the sharpness 
gap between B&W and color is probably shrinking and may no 
longer be as critical as it once was."


My experience scanning color negative film to B&W for Piezo 
output: I recently scanned some Fuji Superia 200 (4 dye layer) 
color neg film using Vuescan software using the 16 bit B&W 
Grayscale setting (I used the Vuescan preset curve for Ilford 
XP2). I was amazed by the quality! Fine-grained, sharp as a tack, 
and the tones & grain looked like I had used was a medium 
speed B&W film shot with a yellow-orange filter (wonderful, rich 
sky-tones with prominent white clouds). 

The final result was beatiful, effortless Piezo B&W prints, without 
any spotting (I used the infrared channel and Vuescan's dust 
removal filter when I scanned the negatives).

So I'm thinking I may abandon my 20-year affair with HP-5+, and 
start shooting the current color-negative emulsions for both my 
B&W and color needs. I'd like to know what others think - I'd 
certainly encourage anyone else to give it a try.

Cheers,
James

Hmm... I never tried scanning color film using a B&W film setting, as I
understand you did in Vuescan. I'll try it, but you lose the capability of
extracting different information out of the three color channels, which you
easily get if you scan in RGB and then convert in grayscale through the
channel mixer.
Anyway, coming back to my original post, I had the roll of Technical Pan
developed and I sadly have to report:
 
1) No apparent gain in sharpness over my usual Supra scans (using Nikon
LS30).
2) Unmanageable contrast, even using soft developer (according to the lab,
which I trust). It wasn't Technidol, recommended by Kodak, nor Agfa Rodinal,
recommended by the photographer in the magazine, but given the 1) point this
doesn't seem to matter much. As an aside, this film is curly as a pig tail,
and placing it in the film holder is very tricky (and dangerous, since it's
easy to damage it).
 
I'll wait for the Canon FS4000 for a final comparison, but currently the
only reason for me to shoot B&W film is that, as I mentioned, I have finally
found a lab I can trust (not the slightest scratch on the film), and they
only develop B&W. This is not to disregard, because even with infrared
cleaning scratches are a real pain, and often is almost impossible to
seamlessly remove them. I understand this is very personal, but what can be
useful to know for everybody is that it IS possible to have clean film from
a lab (I was almost hopeless, after three different pro labs returned my
rolls more or less damaged).
 
Alessandro Pardi

-----Original Message-----
From: James Lerager [mailto:JLerager@...]
Sent: sabato 27 ottobre 2001 03.07
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Film poll


Martin Wesley wrote:

"I have shot some Supra but have not tried scanning it yet. With 
all the advances in film technology in recent years the sharpness 
gap between B&W and color is probably shrinking and may no 
longer be as critical as it once was."


My experience scanning color negative film to B&W for Piezo 
output: I recently scanned some Fuji Superia 200 (4 dye layer) 
color neg film using Vuescan software using the 16 bit B&W 
Grayscale setting (I used the Vuescan preset curve for Ilford 
XP2). I was amazed by the quality! Fine-grained, sharp as a tack, 
and the tones & grain looked like I had used was a medium 
speed B&W film shot with a yellow-orange filter (wonderful, rich 
sky-tones with prominent white clouds). 

The final result was beatiful, effortless Piezo B&W prints, without 
any spotting (I used the infrared channel and Vuescan's dust 
removal filter when I scanned the negatives).

So I'm thinking I may abandon my 20-year affair with HP-5+, and 
start shooting the current color-negative emulsions for both my 
B&W and color needs. I'd like to know what others think - I'd 
certainly encourage anyone else to give it a try.

Cheers,
James




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