Digital BW, The Print

I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my goal is 
to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I intend 
to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
generally aware of the associated problems with grain when scanning 
these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans from 
these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and expect 
to investigate the carbon inks.

My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the grain 
using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is for 
anyone out there working with similar films, formats and methods.

What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great results? 
Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the Minolta 
Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 4000tf; or 
the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.

Ed Metz

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
"naturalphoto2001" <emetz45@h...> wrote:
> I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my goal is 
> to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I intend 
> to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
> generally aware of the associated problems with grain when scanning 
> these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans from 
> these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and expect 
> to investigate the carbon inks.
> 
> My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
> frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the grain 
> using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is for 
> anyone out there working with similar films, formats and methods.
> 
> What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great results? 
> Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the Minolta 
> Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 4000tf; or 
> the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.
> 
> Ed Metz

Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/

Thanks, Jim, for the informative links. I have heard that film 
scanners that use a flourescent light source may be better for 
minimizing grain. Can anyone confirm this?

Ed Metz

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 
<jim0266@y...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> "naturalphoto2001" <emetz45@h...> wrote:
> > I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my 
goal is 
> > to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I 
intend 
> > to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
> > generally aware of the associated problems with grain when 
scanning 
> > these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans 
from 
> > these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and 
expect 
> > to investigate the carbon inks.
> > 
> > My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
> > frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the 
grain 
> > using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is for 
> > anyone out there working with similar films, formats and methods.
> > 
> > What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great results? 
> > Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the Minolta 
> > Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 
4000tf; or 

> > the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.
> > 
> > Ed Metz
> 
> Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
> http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 
> Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
> http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/

Jim, do you have an idea whether the Microtek Artixscan 120 behaves as
favorable as its smaller brother, the 4000?
Otherwise, is there someone who uses/ has used the Artixscan 120? 
It seems that it is the scanner former marketed as Polaroid Sprintscan
120, it looks exactly the same.

The prohibitive costs and insane update rate of digital SLRs have
driven me back - at least for the moment - to film, 35mm and 120 film.

regards, Bernie

> Jim, do you have an idea whether the Microtek Artixscan 120 behaves as
> favorable as its smaller brother, the 4000?
> Otherwise, is there someone who uses/ has used the Artixscan 120? 
> It seems that it is the scanner former marketed as Polaroid Sprintscan
> 120, it looks exactly the same.
> 
> The prohibitive costs and insane update rate of digital SLRs have
> driven me back - at least for the moment - to film, 35mm and 120 film.
> 
> regards, Bernie

Bernie, sorry I don't have any knowledge about the 120. On the
Microtek website at http://www.microtekusa.com/as120tf.html they don't
mention a light source.  You may try http://tinyurl.com/6y9lv

Ed:

I've scanned lots and lots of 35mm Tri-X on a Nikon 4000 and printed 
it with a 1280 using Piezo Selenium Tone inks with good results.  
Grain is an issue, but Tri-X has grain; some people think the grain 
is the best thing about it.  Scan at 4000 spi; turn off all forms of 
processing in the scanner; be careful (be very careful) when you 
sharpen it.  And good luck!

Chuck



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 
<jim0266@y...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> "naturalphoto2001" <emetz45@h...> wrote:
> > I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my goal 
is 
> > to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I 
intend 
> > to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
> > generally aware of the associated problems with grain when 
scanning 
> > these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans 
from 
> > these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and 
expect 
> > to investigate the carbon inks.
> > 
> > My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
> > frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the 
grain 
> > using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is for 
> > anyone out there working with similar films, formats and methods.
> > 
> > What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great results? 
> > Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the Minolta 
> > Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 4000tf; 
or 

> > the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.
> > 
> > Ed Metz
> 
> Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
> http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/

Like Chuck I too have scanned lots of silver-based B&W negs on my
Nikon LS-4000 with great results.  The light source theory about one
being "better" than the other for B&W scanning is just that, theory. 
Reality is one must take a renewed approach in their entire workflow
if they are to be scanning versus printing B&W in the traditional
darkroom.  A lot of the basic B&W shooting workflow from exposure,
development technique, etc may need tweaking to get the best results
from scanner you'll be using.  I've scanned on Nikon, Minolta, Canon
and Epson scanners and have gotten great and poor results from all of
them with B&W negs.  And I did not find one or the other "easier" or
"better" for B&W.  I did find the Nikon LS-4000 to be the best overall
so that's the one I use primarily today for my 35mm work.

Richard

----- Original Message -----
From: cschaible94111 <cschaible@...>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:43:49 -0000
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B&W Negative Scanner Suggestions
To: digitalblackandwhitetheprint@yahoogroups.com

Ed:

I've scanned lots and lots of 35mm Tri-X on a Nikon 4000 and printed 
it with a 1280 using Piezo Selenium Tone inks with good results.  
Grain is an issue, but Tri-X has grain; some people think the grain 
is the best thing about it.  Scan at 4000 spi; turn off all forms of 
processing in the scanner; be careful (be very careful) when you 
sharpen it.  And good luck!

Chuck



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 


<jim0266@y...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> "naturalphoto2001" <emetz45@h...> wrote:
> > I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my goal 
is 
> > to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I 
intend 
> > to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
> > generally aware of the associated problems with grain when 
scanning 
> > these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans 
from 
> > these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and 
expect 
> > to investigate the carbon inks.
> > 
> > My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
> > frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the 
grain 
> > using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is for 
> > anyone out there working with similar films, formats and methods.
> > 
> > What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great results? 
> > Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the Minolta 
> > Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 4000tf; 
or 
> > the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.
> > 
> > Ed Metz
> 
> Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
> http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/





Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
resources as they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from
the membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital
B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
removed from the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group
Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the
Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER"
AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE
LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES),
RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW,
THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF
YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD
PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT


________________________________
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
  
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 
>On the
> Microtek website at http://www.microtekusa.com/as120tf.html they don't
> mention a light source.  

Thanks for the link, actually they do mention "Cold-Cathode Lamp", as
for the Microtek 4000. SO the technology may be very similar. 

As the Nikon 9000 is out of my prive range, I will eventually get the
Microtec. Formerly I heard a lot of nice things about the Polaroid 120
sprintscan, which was actually the same scanner in an earlier version.
Was praised for its high density capability and sharpness. As I mostly
will do b&w negs, it should be a fine choice. 

Probably I will just wait for the photokina announcments, and if -
what is very likely - the new DSLR camera generation will be very
expensive, I will buy the scanner.

regards, Bernie

Thanks everyone, for your comments. I guess, just like most things, 
there is no set "right" way to work in the digital darkroom. I'll be 
taking the plunge soon and aquiring a mid-range scanner/printer 
combo and look forward to learning the old-fashioned way how to 
achieve the results I want. More importantly, I intend to stop 
worrying about every little pixel and get out there and TAKE THOSE 
PICTURES! BTW, this is perhaps the most active, informative and 
helpful group I've run across. Keep up the good work!

Ed Metz

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard 
Sintchak <rich815@g...> wrote:
> Like Chuck I too have scanned lots of silver-based B&W negs on my
> Nikon LS-4000 with great results.  The light source theory about 
one
> being "better" than the other for B&W scanning is just that, 
theory. 
> Reality is one must take a renewed approach in their entire 
workflow
> if they are to be scanning versus printing B&W in the traditional
> darkroom.  A lot of the basic B&W shooting workflow from exposure,
> development technique, etc may need tweaking to get the best 
results
> from scanner you'll be using.  I've scanned on Nikon, Minolta, 
Canon
> and Epson scanners and have gotten great and poor results from all 
of
> them with B&W negs.  And I did not find one or the other "easier" 
or
> "better" for B&W.  I did find the Nikon LS-4000 to be the best 
overall
> so that's the one I use primarily today for my 35mm work.
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: cschaible94111 <cschaible@c...>
> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:43:49 -0000
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B&W Negative Scanner Suggestions
> To: digitalblackandwhitetheprint@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Ed:
> 
> I've scanned lots and lots of 35mm Tri-X on a Nikon 4000 and 
printed 
> it with a 1280 using Piezo Selenium Tone inks with good results.  
> Grain is an issue, but Tri-X has grain; some people think the 
grain 
> is the best thing about it.  Scan at 4000 spi; turn off all forms 
of 
> processing in the scanner; be careful (be very careful) when you 
> sharpen it.  And good luck!
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jim0266" 
> 
> 
> <jim0266@y...> wrote:
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> > "naturalphoto2001" <emetz45@h...> wrote:
> > > I am new here and hope that this isn't too off topic, but my 
goal 
> is 
> > > to produce quality inkjet prints from 35mm B&W negatives. I 
> intend 
> > > to use a "classic" silver film, such as Tri-X or HP5 and am 
> > > generally aware of the associated problems with grain when 
> scanning 
> > > these films. If (perhaps a BIG IF) I can get acceptable scans 
> from 
> > > these negs, I plan on printing on either a 1280 or 2200 and 
> expect 
> > > to investigate the carbon inks.
> > > 
> > > My preliminary tests with a Minolta Dimage III were quite 
> > > frightening, but I am beginning to learn how to minimize the 
> grain 
> > > using Neat Image and other Photoshop methods. My question is 
for 
> > > anyone out there working with similar films, formats and 
methods.
> > > 
> > > What scanners and workflow methods are gving you great 
results? 
> > > Scanners that I would consider in my price range are the 
Minolta 
> > > Dimage IV, 5400 or maybe even the MultiPro; the Artixscan 
4000tf; 

> or 
> > > the Nikon 5000ED. Thanks in advance for any insights.
> > > 
> > > Ed Metz
> > 
> > Please see http://www.jimarnold.org/4000tf/ and
> > http://www.jimarnold.org/1280/
>

Good luck Ed with whatever you decide to get.  Come back and show us
the results, frustrations and successes!

Richard

----- Original Message -----
From: naturalphoto2001 <emetz45@...>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:46:15 -0000
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B&W Negative Scanner Suggestions
To: digitalblackandwhitetheprint@yahoogroups.com

Thanks everyone, for your comments. I guess, just like most things, 
there is no set "right" way to work in the digital darkroom. I'll be 
taking the plunge soon and aquiring a mid-range scanner/printer 
combo and look forward to learning the old-fashioned way how to 
achieve the results I want. More importantly, I intend to stop 
worrying about every little pixel and get out there and TAKE THOSE 
PICTURES! BTW, this is perhaps the most active, informative and 
helpful group I've run across. Keep up the good work!

Ed Metz